Talk:it's the economy, stupid

Dictionary material?
Isn't this more of a Wikiquote article? I mean look at the definition. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:31, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

it&
Per above, Wiktionary is not Wikiquote. In linguistic terms, it's expressed entirely by the sum of its parts. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:06, 12 April 2010 (UTC)


 * The way the entry is structured implies that an editor believes this is a proverb. As such, it would qualify for inclusion. I think it's overly specific to be considered a proverb, and I'm happy to delete, but we need a guideline to keep this from happening continually. —Michael Z. 2010-04-12 15:33 z 
 * Delete per MZ. &#x200b;—msh210℠ 21:55, 12 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Yep, delete this, but keep the dictionary-worthy it's the something, stupid. ---&gt; Tooironic 21:05, 13 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Addressing someone as “stupid” doesn't belong in the phrasebook. A snowclone is not an aphorism or proverb. And I don't think it's idiomatic. (“Phrase template?”) How is that entry dictionary-worthy? —Michael Z. 2010-04-15 20:06 z 
 * It is a snowclone of a catchphrase. To a language-learner coming across it in some reading about the US during the Clinton and Bush years, the catchphrase might merit some explanation. Perhaps that explanation should be found via an soft redirect to a Wikipedia article that contains the reference.
 * A snowclone is not readily found by search (Google, OneLook, or ours), especially not one with fairly common component terms. DCDuring TALK 21:46, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Apparently the term doesn't just address some as "stupid". ("Apparently", because I'm not American.) It indicates that that "something is what matters, that it is considered essential and should be the focus or addressed." In this way it is arguably idiomatic. ---&gt; Tooironic 23:17, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. &#x200b;—msh210℠ 16:39, 2 June 2010 (UTC)