Delete. These are not used with meaning in running text, only in URLs. URLs are outside the scope of a dictionary. —Rua (mew)21:43, 7 November 2018 (UTC)Reply
They do have semantics, as noted below. This one is a domain name suffix meaning 'associated with France'. Now, the names may be applied sloppily - google.fr may mean 'Google for French' rather than 'Google for France', and youtu.be has nothing to do with Belgium. And they do occur in speech; I've compared prices on amazon.com and amazon.co.uk in a conversation. We could argue that it's a suffix rather than an abbreviation. --RichardW57 (talk)00:53, 23 December 2018 (UTC)Reply
Lots of domain names in .fr aren’t associated with France at all. They are sold freely, I could set up a website about Japan in Czech there if I would like. There is really nothing behind the .fr other than being a top-level DNS domain.Guldrelokk (talk)02:40, 23 December 2018 (UTC)Reply
Setting up such a domain would be perverse. What would be the motivation? The interpretation of the name would be that there was some connection with France. --RichardW57 (talk)11:09, 23 December 2018 (UTC)Reply
Keep all. I'd expect some folks to come to Wiktionary to look these up. It is advantageous to Wiktionary to be a go-to resource for all kinds of semantic lookup. These clearly mean something, ie, a given country, in the context in which they are used. There is even a grammar in which these are used. Why should users have to learn the arcane rules by which we exclude such things? I'd be inclined to revisit some of our decisions to exclude, say, airport codes, telephone codes for countries and regions, etc.DCDuring (talk)22:27, 22 December 2018 (UTC)Reply
Why stop at the top-level domains? amazon.com clearly means something, namely the company Amazon Inc., with which its subdomains are associated – in fact, much more consistently than those of .fr.Guldrelokk (talk)02:48, 23 December 2018 (UTC)Reply
There are rules restricting company names on Wiktionary. But if we allowed amazon.fr, then its etymology would have to reference the TLD. There would also be an SOP issue. -- (late signature)RichardW57 (talk)16:38, 23 December 2018 (UTC)Reply
Strong delete, with POSSIBLE exceptions for the very commonly spoken ones like .com and .net: as a guy who has spent his entire life in an IT career. These are definitely erroneous: the dot is a separator. In a string likebob.users.example.com, the units arebob,users,example andcom (which express a hierarchy) and the dots only serve to separate. In everyday slang people use words likedotcom but it is ignorant and foolish to include the dot as part of every TLD in general. It's like having a phone number "0123-456-789" and telling someone that your number is "-456-789" and including that separating hyphen, when you omit the local prefix.Equinox◑02:47, 23 December 2018 (UTC)Reply
I believe that in normal parlance, where TLD is an unfamiliar TLA, the '.' is part of the expression, just as with file extensions (.doc etc.). I can certainly imagine, "He used a .fr domain for his Czech website about Japan!" How would you account for the '.' in a grammatical analysis? --(late signature)RichardW57 (talk)16:38, 23 December 2018 (UTC)Reply
I don't think ".fr" is analysable at all within the grammar of natural language. It's simply spelling out the suffix of the domain literally. It can be argued that the speaker has parsed the URL wrong, but that's a matter of the person's understanding of URLs, not their understanding of English certainly. —Rua (mew)22:19, 30 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
@Johnny Shiz Does.com actually have anymeaning there? I interpret the sentence as meaning exactly the same asyou're the bomb!. The.com part doesn't seem to contribute anything to the meaning of the sentence, and one of the requirements ofWT:CFI is that terms convey meaning. —Rua (mew)22:12, 30 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
This reasoning is thoroughly, impressively flawed and reads like a willing misinterpretation of CFI. Why do we recordkitty-cat when neither part adds any meaning to the other; why do we recordpathway when it means the same thing aspath; why do we recordninnyhammer when the "-hammer" adds no apparent meaning to the termninny?bomb dot com, orbomb.com or however it should be spelled, is undeniably a "thing". That's not to say it should have any bearing on the status of.com on its own -- just that to denyit for this swiss-cheese reasoning is patently wrong.M. I. Wright (talk)08:33, 27 November 2019 (UTC)Reply
Delete all words thatjust have senses meaning the TLD itself..com and.org probably have actual linguistic, figurative meanings (it's my guess), but.az, for example, probably doesn't.PseudoSkull (talk)01:48, 13 August 2019 (UTC)Reply
Was going to vote keep, but then noticed that{{ccTLD}} is out of sync (last update 5 years ago), so it's useless and potentially misleading.Delete. –Jberkel16:23, 19 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
