The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 00:08, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thy name is (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I'm not convinced that this meets WP:NOTABILITY. Previous AfD was closed with only one comment due to the nominator's sockpuppetry rather than the notability fo the subject. Pinging those who have commented on its notability previously: Nathanmurray1, Lambiam, Jnelson09. Boleyn (talk) 12:11, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Full disclosure, article creator. That said, as snowclones go, this one's notability, honestly, shouldn't even be in question. This was coined by the William Shakespeare in one of his most revered works: Hamlet, and is probably the most quotable line from the play after "To be or not to be..." (which also has its own Wikipedia page, incidentally). The term has been used constantly ever since over the last 400 years throughout the English speaking world. Recent examples:

• "Fragility, thy name is Iran" -- from the Asian Times on March 29, 2015
• "Hypocrisy, thy name is Obama." -- From the Boston Globe on March 27, 2015
• "Stockholm Syndrome, thy name is Beauty and the Beast." -- from VH1 on March 28, 2015
• "Overconfidence, thy name is not Sutter." -- from The Los Angeles Times on March 20, 2015
• "Treachery, thy name is 'Justified'" -- from The Washington Post on February 24, 2015
• "Progress, thy name is not Dick Durbin." -- from The Wall Street Journal on March 19, 2015

Honestly, I could do this for hours. It has penetrated the English lexicon indisputably.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 13:57, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:57, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep It seems to me to be a valid WP:WORDISSUBJECT. I think the examples could be trimmed down a little, though. Tigraan (talk) 16:11, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.