Jump to content

Portal talk:Current events/2008 June 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

June 1

[edit]

ITN Candidates

[edit]

Note: The 2008 Super 14 Final discussion has been moved to May 31.--Pharos (talk) 13:06, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is adequately updated but this may be too local, given that there were no fatalities and nothing of great cultural import appears to have been lost. There is also a question of a merge with Universal Studios Hollywood. I would appreciate input from other users on this one. - BanyanTree 11:38, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I support that. --Bender235 (talk) 12:35, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
We need an updated item above or, if the update is at Portal:Current events/Sports, a suggested wording here. - BanyanTree 12:48, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly support including "Usain Bolt of Jamacia sets a new 100 metres world record at the Reebox Grand Prix in New York" or something along those lines. LukeSurl t c 19:11, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The most important track and field record. -CWY2190(talkcontributions) 19:20, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest changing the world record link to world record (ie links to World record progression 100 metres men) 91.109.198.46 (talk) 20:04, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Suggestion was started 5 hours earlier on the date on which this event took place and was added to the portal (31st May). However, to use the word "dash" as part of the headline on the Main Page ITN section is very much US English, and the Main Page should be as version neutral as possible. I believe that simple "100 metres", given the context, is adequate in any language. Further, there is no need to give the sponsor's name: they are not paying Wikipedia, and the name of the event (which is probably not needed anyway) is meaningful and widely understood without it. Suggest rephrase to "Usain Bolt of Jamaica sets a new world record of 9.72 seconds in the 100 metres in New York." Kevin McE (talk) 20:42, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Aren't we to use the English used on the place where the event happened? How about on basketball, we'd use British English? That'll be bizarre. --Howard the Duck 11:38, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please read the comment. I said that it should be "as version neutral as possible": in this instance, totally neutral language is possible, and so should be used. Is there a reason why we are still providing the Reebok corporation with free publicity on ITN? Kevin McE (talk) 12:06, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Which roughly translates into "get rid of U.S. English since it's really not English English anyway. I wonder how would the NBA Finals result be written? "The Los Angeles Lakers defeats the Boston Celtic F.C. at the the arena named after an office supplies chain."
As I've said before, let's use the English used at the place where event was held. --Howard the Duck 13:12, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Misrepresentation is not constructive. Please desist. Kevin McE (talk) 14:44, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't the English of the person involved take precedence over the place it occured? This is about Usain Bolt's world record, not the place the world record occured. Heck, I don't even know where that is and I suspect many other people likewise. Nil Einne (talk) 19:23, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Macedonian voters go to the polls for the Macedonian parliamentary election, 2008 with reports of violence in ethnic Albanian areas.--TheFEARgod (Ч) 20:27, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Posted. Note that future elections are not normally valid candidates as ITN waits until there are results, but the violence appears to be the story in the item, rather than the election itself. - BanyanTree 22:07, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
We should update the same item with the results later. Hobartimus (talk) 07:17, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely. Please feel free to suggest an update once new content is added to the article. Thanks, BanyanTree 23:17, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wording comment: Instead of "landslide victory", can we have ..."with ##% of the vote"? SpencerT♦C 11:15, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The article has barely more information than the actual blurb and the topic isn't "small" enough that readers can easily extrapolate background. I feel that minimum standards for amount of updated information have not been met on this item. - BanyanTree 23:17, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've added a couple sentences and posted this item. - BanyanTree 11:18, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]