![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
I plan to move the list of eponyms to a new article where it can be made into categories. See the "Eponyms" section in the Lists of etymologies for an existing category-based listing. The list moved from this page could become the default alphabetically ordered list. Jay 17:48, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
I added an Internet link to a very useful site on medical eponyms (i.e. what did Dr James Parkinson do for a living apart from describing the hypokinetic-rigid syndrome named after him) Jfdwolff 10:53, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)
some discussions have been moved over to talk:list of eponyms
Are eponymic and eponymous synonyms? The article says to use "eponymic" as an adjective to describe the relationship of an object to its eponym, but I frequently use "eponymous". Am I wrong? - DropDeadGorgias (talk) 16:19, Jun 11, 2004 (UTC)
"Some books, films, and TV shows are eponymous with their principal character(s): Beavis and Butt-head and Daria, for example." "Are eponymous with" is an ungainly construction that shows its unfamiliarity with the term. Isn't the better usage that these books have eponymous heroes? This text (I haven't moved it from the article) seems oblivious to the passage that directly precedes it. -- Wetman 16:20, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I'm not sure the definition of eponym is correct. MSN Encarta lists it as being the person named after or the thing being named.
http://ca.encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861608906/eponym.html
Could some one please add a useful pronunciation guide? I can find them online but they are confusing. How is this pronounced? hdstubbs
It seems to me that eponym is the name of a person, not the person itself. Since the name is then shared by the eponymous person and the thing named after him, eponym can also be used for the thing named after that person. Zwart 00:28, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
The opening paragraph seems to have a backwards definition:
One who is referred to as eponymous is someone who gives his or her name to something, e.g. Julian, the eponymous owner of the famous restaurant Julian's Castle.
This suggests that the owner's name was derived from that of the restaurant. Finwailin ( talk) 12:28, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
I took out, " chanceries, especially at the court of a prince aspiring pivotal importance to his entire state's society, and was copied by minor dignitaries, even prelates", and substituted, "courts". The use of chancery here does not match the Wiktionary definition, and b/c this is too much detail for an article on names, not political movements. Maybe the whole parethetical comment should be removed, too. Mdotley 16:07, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
I've added a few examples to the governmental/administrative eponym list; as originally written, it sounded like the Americans are the only ones in the English-speaking world to use eponyms in this way. If anybody knows some good examples from other English-speaking countries.... -- Charlene 12:26, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
I read the whole page, I read this whole talk page, and I still don't quite understand what an eponym is. Could someone explain it, or give an example? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.111.167.39 ( talk) 04:30, 10 April 2007 (UTC).
It's a fancy word for people who want to seem more intelligent than they actually are as evidenced by the (too) many uses of the word in Wikipedia articles, many of which are incorrect. For example: "Dickie Roberts is an eponymous former child star on a TV sitcom " from the Wikipedia article on the movie Dickie Roberts Former Child Star. As written, this doesn't make much sense. Or how about this? Previously in the Wikipedia article about The Last Picture show this statement was made: "...Sam the Lion, owner of the eponymous movie theater..." The movie theater in the film was not named The Last Picture Show, so how could it be eponymous? When the word eponymous is correct, how about using "named after" or "named for" instead? Why use a fify cent word when a nickel word will do? Isn't the point of an encyclopedic article supposed to be to communicate clearly with the reader rather than confuse and aleinate them by using big words and using them incorrectly. I'm starting a petition to outlaw the use of the word eponymous in every Wikipedia article as well as outlawing the use of Family Guy episodes in the trivia section of every Wikipedia article. Sign below :-)
This is possibly the most overused word anywhere in the whole of Wikipedia. Tomwhite56 ( talk) 16:31, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Given how many articles of clothing are named after the people (both real and fictitious) who popularised them, I'm surprised that there isn't a category/link on this page for items such as Wellington boots, Fedoras, Daisy Dukes, Cardigans, &c. I'd do it myself but I don't know how 165.91.64.136 ( talk)RKH —Preceding undated comment was added at 06:49, 25 December 2008 (UTC).
One thing I dont get is my spelling book says An Eponym is a word that comes from someones name. For Example, the leotard was named after Jules Leotard, a trapeze artist. Write the content word that was formed by adding the old latin term for "ten" to part of Alexander Graham Bell's name. I really needed help. I came to Wikipedia and I found what I needed. Now I know that the answer to the guestion is Decibel. Wikipedia doesn't give you the answer but helps you out alot more than any other website I have been. I appreciate all the help Wikipedia. Thanks, Wikipedia Lover. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.187.123.112 ( talk) 22:09, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Clearly some people are keen to show their erudition by emphasising the 'person' definition, or even, as at present in this article, eliminating the 'thing' definition altogether.
Well, language evolves, and in the real world 'eponym' is mostly used to mean the thing named. Increasingly rarely, it can still mean the person it is named after or for.
Collins dictionary (which reliably balances contemporary and accepted usage) gives both definitions, of course, but puts the 'thing' ahead of the 'person'.
So please will anyone who objects to our including both meanings in the opening sentences of this article discuss it here, to avoid a silly edit war when I amend the entry in a short while. Earthlyreason ( talk) 10:51, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Thatcherism appears under North American examples. Last time I checked, Thatcher was from the UK. Is this a section of history I've neglected or a logical error in the article? 220.233.199.72 ( talk) 04:03, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
The article says "In contemporary English, the term eponymous is often used to mean self-titled." There is no definition of "self-titled". This is not good! I think "self-titled" means "named after oneself." That seems to be just a special case of the normal definition, so do we need a special statement about "self-titling"? I will put in a definition of "self-titled" and see what happens. Zaslav ( talk) 04:33, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
How do we know that self titled Albums are really the name of the band? For example Led Zeppelin I, just has Led Zeppelin on the title, It only says that name once. How do we know its saying the title of the album is Led Zeppelin and not having that as the name of the Band? Led Zeppelin IV didn't say anything and it's Untitled. Almost no bands have the name of the band on the album twice. So either the band or the album isn't getting credit. Or the album isn't really self titled. -- 24.94.251.190 ( talk) 22:27, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
"Many other artists and bands have also served as eponyms of albums or singles, usually as their debut or second release." Really? I don`t think so. Guess I`ll check back here in a year, and probably not feel rude deleting "or second" then. Fp cassini ( talk) 20:39, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
I am surprised that the article does not include a section on, or a least a list of eponyms in the Bible - there must be hundreds of them. The names of most of the peoples, nations, and countries of the Hebrew Scripture are treated as deriving from some eponymous ancestor. Many, if not all, are commonly regarded by Biblical scholars as etiological myths but they would still seem count as eponyms. I could start a list, but I am just afraid that I may be missing the overall point of the article since this category seems to me like such an obvious desideratum. Stephendcole ( talk) 13:44, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
The article seems to focus on eponyms which are capitalized, reflecting a continuing recognition of their eponymous origins. I am not seeing an explanation of eponyms whose roots are no longer obvious and which therefore have also lost their capitalization. I am thinking of such words as sandwich, bloomers, and silhouette, to give typical examples. Certainly the degree to which a word is recognized as eponymous will vary from person to person, but as I am suggesting here, there is at least a rough distinction between eponymous words that are capitalized and those that are not (allowing, or course, for a middle catagory where the orthography is not consistent.) Stephendcole ( talk) 14:02, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
I'm not sure to what degree this article meets the criteria for an encyclopedic rather than a dictionary article. Perhaps better for Wiktionary? Dcattell ( talk) 19:38, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
I have an insight that the word "eponymous" is frequently misused in this Wikipedia. It may be used in the reverse sense, written in the place of " homonymous" (a less known word), or just instead of stating that two names are the same in plain English language. Look at the Gorilla article:
“ | Gorillas comprise the eponymous genus Gorilla… | ” |
Could we say that the genus is "a person or thing, whether real or fictitious, after which gorillas are named"? No, exactly the opposite: the genus Gorilla is named after gorillas. Could I just drop the word, or some replacement is desirable? Note that my English is not native, so I really need this advice. Incnis Mrsi ( talk) 15:08, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
Please note the following from oxforddictionaries.com which is linked to from the OED entry for eponymous (at least the version I can access from the Boston Public LIbrary website - I think that's 2nd ed), and which the OED main entry indicates is a 'current' definition:
eponymous Pronunciation: /ɪˈpɒnɪməs/
Definition of eponymous
adjective
(of a person) giving their name to something: the eponymous hero of the novel
(of a thing) named after a particular person or group: their eponymous debut LP
Derivatives
eponymously
adverb
Note in particular that 'eponymous' can refer either to the person for whom something is named, or the 'something' that is named for the person. As an example: the Wikipedia page, 'List of eponymous laws'.
I think the eponym entry could be simplified if this dual meaning were presented. Possibly by some sort of warning about 'alternate' or 'current' usage? This alternate usage is in fact often encountered, and not to mention it in the article seems to increase rather than lessen confusion.
Ken M Quirici 16:15, 20 December 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kquirici ( talk • contribs)
It would appear that the introductory explanation of "eponymous" is rather opinionated and not derived from any particular reference, at least not one which is cited. Specifically, The section being referred to is the following:
"However, good usage advice for careful writers is that they should avoid overuse of these senses, because their overuse annoys many readers. It is long- and well-established usage to call terms such as "Down syndrome" or "DeBakey needle holder" eponyms; but careful usage includes using "self-titled" rather than "eponymous" when describing self-titled music albums, and refraining from calling businesses named after their owners (such as "Pat's Diner") "eponymous" (such businesses are ubiquitous, but the use of the word "eponymous" is better left non-ubiquitous)." [1]
This is loaded with subjective phrases that do not enhance the understanding of the word.
>>Who determined that this was 'good' advice? >>How was it divined that this 'annoys many readers'? >>Where is the reference for 'careful usage includes using "self-titled" rather than "eponymous" when describing self-titled music albums, and refraining from calling businesses named after their owners (such as "Pat's Diner") "eponymous"'? >>'the use of the word "eponymous" is better left non-ubiquitous' -- again, hello subjectivity and no citation to corroborate why it is 'better' left this way.
It was very kind to contribute to the article. It was also gracious to attempt to provide more information on the usage, but perhaps this portion should be revised to be more objective, well referenced, or both.
References
{{
cite web}}
: Check date values in: |accessdate=
(
help)
I have two questions involving eponyms relevant to this article. Firstly, in works of fiction where the title of the novel, etc is named after the character (e.g Jane Eyre), is it proper usage to call them an 'eponymous character'? Secondly, in situations where the name of something is derived from someone's status or title (e.g. The Giant's causeway being named after the giant Fionn mac Cumhaill), not specifically their name, does that count as an eponym? 60.242.210.126 ( talk) 23:53, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
The second definition previously given in the article, "name-recipient", was absurd, and was not supported by the reference given. Everything, if there's a word for it, is a "name-recipient". An eponym is a person whose name is given to some place or thing, or it is the name itself. It is not the place or thing so named. I have accordingly rewritten the lede to eliminate the absurdity.
The adjective, eponymous means, "being or having to do with an eponym": i.e., the person or thing for whom something is named (e.g., "the eponymous founder of Walt Disney Productions"). One dictionary (Collins) also allows it to mean, "named for its creator or central character" (e.g. "R.E.M.'s eponymous album, 'R.E.M.'"); but Merriam-Webster doesn't. I have accordingly attributed that sense to "recent usage".
The rest of the article still needs a thorough rewriting. J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 20:48, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Would the system of naming years after the reign of emperors be suitable to include in the time-line section of this article? I am new to the concept of editing on Wikipedia so please excuse me for posting here.
? 141.6.11.23 ( talk) 18:42, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Eponym. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:57, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
I plan to move the list of eponyms to a new article where it can be made into categories. See the "Eponyms" section in the Lists of etymologies for an existing category-based listing. The list moved from this page could become the default alphabetically ordered list. Jay 17:48, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
I added an Internet link to a very useful site on medical eponyms (i.e. what did Dr James Parkinson do for a living apart from describing the hypokinetic-rigid syndrome named after him) Jfdwolff 10:53, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)
some discussions have been moved over to talk:list of eponyms
Are eponymic and eponymous synonyms? The article says to use "eponymic" as an adjective to describe the relationship of an object to its eponym, but I frequently use "eponymous". Am I wrong? - DropDeadGorgias (talk) 16:19, Jun 11, 2004 (UTC)
"Some books, films, and TV shows are eponymous with their principal character(s): Beavis and Butt-head and Daria, for example." "Are eponymous with" is an ungainly construction that shows its unfamiliarity with the term. Isn't the better usage that these books have eponymous heroes? This text (I haven't moved it from the article) seems oblivious to the passage that directly precedes it. -- Wetman 16:20, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I'm not sure the definition of eponym is correct. MSN Encarta lists it as being the person named after or the thing being named.
http://ca.encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861608906/eponym.html
Could some one please add a useful pronunciation guide? I can find them online but they are confusing. How is this pronounced? hdstubbs
It seems to me that eponym is the name of a person, not the person itself. Since the name is then shared by the eponymous person and the thing named after him, eponym can also be used for the thing named after that person. Zwart 00:28, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
The opening paragraph seems to have a backwards definition:
One who is referred to as eponymous is someone who gives his or her name to something, e.g. Julian, the eponymous owner of the famous restaurant Julian's Castle.
This suggests that the owner's name was derived from that of the restaurant. Finwailin ( talk) 12:28, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
I took out, " chanceries, especially at the court of a prince aspiring pivotal importance to his entire state's society, and was copied by minor dignitaries, even prelates", and substituted, "courts". The use of chancery here does not match the Wiktionary definition, and b/c this is too much detail for an article on names, not political movements. Maybe the whole parethetical comment should be removed, too. Mdotley 16:07, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
I've added a few examples to the governmental/administrative eponym list; as originally written, it sounded like the Americans are the only ones in the English-speaking world to use eponyms in this way. If anybody knows some good examples from other English-speaking countries.... -- Charlene 12:26, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
I read the whole page, I read this whole talk page, and I still don't quite understand what an eponym is. Could someone explain it, or give an example? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.111.167.39 ( talk) 04:30, 10 April 2007 (UTC).
It's a fancy word for people who want to seem more intelligent than they actually are as evidenced by the (too) many uses of the word in Wikipedia articles, many of which are incorrect. For example: "Dickie Roberts is an eponymous former child star on a TV sitcom " from the Wikipedia article on the movie Dickie Roberts Former Child Star. As written, this doesn't make much sense. Or how about this? Previously in the Wikipedia article about The Last Picture show this statement was made: "...Sam the Lion, owner of the eponymous movie theater..." The movie theater in the film was not named The Last Picture Show, so how could it be eponymous? When the word eponymous is correct, how about using "named after" or "named for" instead? Why use a fify cent word when a nickel word will do? Isn't the point of an encyclopedic article supposed to be to communicate clearly with the reader rather than confuse and aleinate them by using big words and using them incorrectly. I'm starting a petition to outlaw the use of the word eponymous in every Wikipedia article as well as outlawing the use of Family Guy episodes in the trivia section of every Wikipedia article. Sign below :-)
This is possibly the most overused word anywhere in the whole of Wikipedia. Tomwhite56 ( talk) 16:31, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Given how many articles of clothing are named after the people (both real and fictitious) who popularised them, I'm surprised that there isn't a category/link on this page for items such as Wellington boots, Fedoras, Daisy Dukes, Cardigans, &c. I'd do it myself but I don't know how 165.91.64.136 ( talk)RKH —Preceding undated comment was added at 06:49, 25 December 2008 (UTC).
One thing I dont get is my spelling book says An Eponym is a word that comes from someones name. For Example, the leotard was named after Jules Leotard, a trapeze artist. Write the content word that was formed by adding the old latin term for "ten" to part of Alexander Graham Bell's name. I really needed help. I came to Wikipedia and I found what I needed. Now I know that the answer to the guestion is Decibel. Wikipedia doesn't give you the answer but helps you out alot more than any other website I have been. I appreciate all the help Wikipedia. Thanks, Wikipedia Lover. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.187.123.112 ( talk) 22:09, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Clearly some people are keen to show their erudition by emphasising the 'person' definition, or even, as at present in this article, eliminating the 'thing' definition altogether.
Well, language evolves, and in the real world 'eponym' is mostly used to mean the thing named. Increasingly rarely, it can still mean the person it is named after or for.
Collins dictionary (which reliably balances contemporary and accepted usage) gives both definitions, of course, but puts the 'thing' ahead of the 'person'.
So please will anyone who objects to our including both meanings in the opening sentences of this article discuss it here, to avoid a silly edit war when I amend the entry in a short while. Earthlyreason ( talk) 10:51, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Thatcherism appears under North American examples. Last time I checked, Thatcher was from the UK. Is this a section of history I've neglected or a logical error in the article? 220.233.199.72 ( talk) 04:03, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
The article says "In contemporary English, the term eponymous is often used to mean self-titled." There is no definition of "self-titled". This is not good! I think "self-titled" means "named after oneself." That seems to be just a special case of the normal definition, so do we need a special statement about "self-titling"? I will put in a definition of "self-titled" and see what happens. Zaslav ( talk) 04:33, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
How do we know that self titled Albums are really the name of the band? For example Led Zeppelin I, just has Led Zeppelin on the title, It only says that name once. How do we know its saying the title of the album is Led Zeppelin and not having that as the name of the Band? Led Zeppelin IV didn't say anything and it's Untitled. Almost no bands have the name of the band on the album twice. So either the band or the album isn't getting credit. Or the album isn't really self titled. -- 24.94.251.190 ( talk) 22:27, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
"Many other artists and bands have also served as eponyms of albums or singles, usually as their debut or second release." Really? I don`t think so. Guess I`ll check back here in a year, and probably not feel rude deleting "or second" then. Fp cassini ( talk) 20:39, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
I am surprised that the article does not include a section on, or a least a list of eponyms in the Bible - there must be hundreds of them. The names of most of the peoples, nations, and countries of the Hebrew Scripture are treated as deriving from some eponymous ancestor. Many, if not all, are commonly regarded by Biblical scholars as etiological myths but they would still seem count as eponyms. I could start a list, but I am just afraid that I may be missing the overall point of the article since this category seems to me like such an obvious desideratum. Stephendcole ( talk) 13:44, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
The article seems to focus on eponyms which are capitalized, reflecting a continuing recognition of their eponymous origins. I am not seeing an explanation of eponyms whose roots are no longer obvious and which therefore have also lost their capitalization. I am thinking of such words as sandwich, bloomers, and silhouette, to give typical examples. Certainly the degree to which a word is recognized as eponymous will vary from person to person, but as I am suggesting here, there is at least a rough distinction between eponymous words that are capitalized and those that are not (allowing, or course, for a middle catagory where the orthography is not consistent.) Stephendcole ( talk) 14:02, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
I'm not sure to what degree this article meets the criteria for an encyclopedic rather than a dictionary article. Perhaps better for Wiktionary? Dcattell ( talk) 19:38, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
I have an insight that the word "eponymous" is frequently misused in this Wikipedia. It may be used in the reverse sense, written in the place of " homonymous" (a less known word), or just instead of stating that two names are the same in plain English language. Look at the Gorilla article:
“ | Gorillas comprise the eponymous genus Gorilla… | ” |
Could we say that the genus is "a person or thing, whether real or fictitious, after which gorillas are named"? No, exactly the opposite: the genus Gorilla is named after gorillas. Could I just drop the word, or some replacement is desirable? Note that my English is not native, so I really need this advice. Incnis Mrsi ( talk) 15:08, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
Please note the following from oxforddictionaries.com which is linked to from the OED entry for eponymous (at least the version I can access from the Boston Public LIbrary website - I think that's 2nd ed), and which the OED main entry indicates is a 'current' definition:
eponymous Pronunciation: /ɪˈpɒnɪməs/
Definition of eponymous
adjective
(of a person) giving their name to something: the eponymous hero of the novel
(of a thing) named after a particular person or group: their eponymous debut LP
Derivatives
eponymously
adverb
Note in particular that 'eponymous' can refer either to the person for whom something is named, or the 'something' that is named for the person. As an example: the Wikipedia page, 'List of eponymous laws'.
I think the eponym entry could be simplified if this dual meaning were presented. Possibly by some sort of warning about 'alternate' or 'current' usage? This alternate usage is in fact often encountered, and not to mention it in the article seems to increase rather than lessen confusion.
Ken M Quirici 16:15, 20 December 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kquirici ( talk • contribs)
It would appear that the introductory explanation of "eponymous" is rather opinionated and not derived from any particular reference, at least not one which is cited. Specifically, The section being referred to is the following:
"However, good usage advice for careful writers is that they should avoid overuse of these senses, because their overuse annoys many readers. It is long- and well-established usage to call terms such as "Down syndrome" or "DeBakey needle holder" eponyms; but careful usage includes using "self-titled" rather than "eponymous" when describing self-titled music albums, and refraining from calling businesses named after their owners (such as "Pat's Diner") "eponymous" (such businesses are ubiquitous, but the use of the word "eponymous" is better left non-ubiquitous)." [1]
This is loaded with subjective phrases that do not enhance the understanding of the word.
>>Who determined that this was 'good' advice? >>How was it divined that this 'annoys many readers'? >>Where is the reference for 'careful usage includes using "self-titled" rather than "eponymous" when describing self-titled music albums, and refraining from calling businesses named after their owners (such as "Pat's Diner") "eponymous"'? >>'the use of the word "eponymous" is better left non-ubiquitous' -- again, hello subjectivity and no citation to corroborate why it is 'better' left this way.
It was very kind to contribute to the article. It was also gracious to attempt to provide more information on the usage, but perhaps this portion should be revised to be more objective, well referenced, or both.
References
{{
cite web}}
: Check date values in: |accessdate=
(
help)
I have two questions involving eponyms relevant to this article. Firstly, in works of fiction where the title of the novel, etc is named after the character (e.g Jane Eyre), is it proper usage to call them an 'eponymous character'? Secondly, in situations where the name of something is derived from someone's status or title (e.g. The Giant's causeway being named after the giant Fionn mac Cumhaill), not specifically their name, does that count as an eponym? 60.242.210.126 ( talk) 23:53, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
The second definition previously given in the article, "name-recipient", was absurd, and was not supported by the reference given. Everything, if there's a word for it, is a "name-recipient". An eponym is a person whose name is given to some place or thing, or it is the name itself. It is not the place or thing so named. I have accordingly rewritten the lede to eliminate the absurdity.
The adjective, eponymous means, "being or having to do with an eponym": i.e., the person or thing for whom something is named (e.g., "the eponymous founder of Walt Disney Productions"). One dictionary (Collins) also allows it to mean, "named for its creator or central character" (e.g. "R.E.M.'s eponymous album, 'R.E.M.'"); but Merriam-Webster doesn't. I have accordingly attributed that sense to "recent usage".
The rest of the article still needs a thorough rewriting. J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 20:48, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Would the system of naming years after the reign of emperors be suitable to include in the time-line section of this article? I am new to the concept of editing on Wikipedia so please excuse me for posting here.
? 141.6.11.23 ( talk) 18:42, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Eponym. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:57, 22 September 2017 (UTC)