Talk:Milton Keynes

RFV discussion
Shenzhen was deleted for no citations, I would like to see if Wiktionarians care more about places in their home countries. Polarpanda 11:56, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Citations added. Stop wasting people's time. SemperBlotto 07:13, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The attributive-use standard requires that the citations illustrate a use that does not simply point to the referent. Thus a "Milton Keynes resident" is merely a resident of Milton Keynes. A usage such as "The Rouse Company built two Milton Keynes developments called Columbia, Maryland and Reston, Virginia." is the kind of attributive use that the "attributive use" standard was intended to include. In that example the term "Milton Keynes" is used attributively and not to refer to Milton Keynes but to suggest that the developments have a constellation of characteristics reminiscent of Milton Keynes.
 * Whether a usage such as "Columbia, Maryland is an American Milton Keynes." or "Columbia, Maryland is a Milton Keynes-type development." should also count would be an interesting question if we keep the attributive-use standard for non-referential (non-encyclopedic) senses.
 * I mention this because some seem to or claim to find the attributive-use standard completely unintelligible. That was in the context of trying to include only non-encyclopedic material, admittedly at a loss of toponymic information, such as etymology, pronunciation, and translation/transliteration. DCDuring TALK 11:02, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Striking, since the attributive use requirement has been removed from the CFI (at least for real places). The entry doesn't seem to meet the new requirements that have sprung up to replace it; but as those requirements aren't citations-based, I see that as a question for RFD, not RFV. —Ruakh TALK 11:57, 4 September 2010 (UTC)