Talk:Billboard (advertising)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is a former featured article. Please see its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed. |
 |
Billboard (advertising) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 24, 2004. |
 |
The spoken word version of this article is part of WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia, an attempt to produce recordings of Wikipedia articles being read aloud. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and find out how to contribute. |
[edit] Older discussions
I think the Times square pic needs to be larger, just to get the detail--it's trying to crowd a lot of fine detail into one image, and a thumbnail doesn't work. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 19:58, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC)
-
- You should make a better image, then... this is turning into a slow-motion edit war.
I was just wondering: why was the original text transformed into American English? I am referring to things like 'hoarding' (the article came here from hoarding because that one was changed to another meaning) and 'digitalised' (spelt with the 's') – oughtn't they to remain as in the original writing in accordance with the Manual of Style? —Sinuhe 07:23, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- If I just added a paragraph or inserted a sentence or two, it would have been unconscionably rude of me to change the spelling and the word used. However, I added 10x the amount of text, reworked the style and wove some of the statements directly into other parts of the text. With this gigantic amount of new writing, I wrote in a style and spellings I knew, and according to another rule in the Manual of Style one should not mix spellings (though I did not go to the Spellings portion of the Manual, this was my reasoning at the time). It was not intended as a slight or to provoke conflict, and I'm sorry if I caused offense. This was my first Wikipedia contribution. --Jkeiser 08:36, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- OK, just so I know the reason – certainly no offence taken. Thank you for the explanation; it makes sense. I usually forget that other people, unlike me, do not consciously decide to write in American English. And it is a wonderful article indeed: congratulations on it. I hope it is featured, for it appears to be of a high standard. Perhaps, however, it is still somewhat inappropriate to mix up motorways on the one and highways on the other hand; the first is a British expression (something akin to an expressway in the USA), the second an American (for what is known simply as main road in Commonwealth English). —Sinuhe 09:45, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- Yeah, I agree, we don't need both. We would have to have different names for our freaking roads! I would just say "link to roads" except that billboards are found much more often on highways than smaller roads here (and I suspect in Europe as well). I vote for linking to highways, just because it links to the others and some articles indicate it is used in both U.S., Australia, and parts of Europe. As an aside, that web of articles about different types of roads is horribly overcomplicated and really must have some redundancies in it--I think other people solved the British/American English problem by making two articles about roughly the same thing. --Jkeiser 06:26, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- OK, just so I know the reason – certainly no offence taken. Thank you for the explanation; it makes sense. I usually forget that other people, unlike me, do not consciously decide to write in American English. And it is a wonderful article indeed: congratulations on it. I hope it is featured, for it appears to be of a high standard. Perhaps, however, it is still somewhat inappropriate to mix up motorways on the one and highways on the other hand; the first is a British expression (something akin to an expressway in the USA), the second an American (for what is known simply as main road in Commonwealth English). —Sinuhe 09:45, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)
[edit] proof
This article just goes to show that even the simplest of article creation can turn into a FA. All I ever did was make a little stub, and now look! Kingturtle 20:02, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- Yep. And to give credit where credit is due, Sinuhe took that stub and expanded the heck out of it to make it a good jumping point for an article. Without that, I might not even have been stimulated enough to start writing; and you can definitely see the evolution of his sentences into sections of the article. Definitely a good example of Wikipedia collaboration. --Jkeiser 06:26, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Tofu
"Eat more tofu" is funny? Could have fooled me. N328KF 11:14, 2004 Jun 24 (UTC)
- I agree, it's not the funniest billboard defacement in the world. I don't think anyone will object if you find a funnier one and put it up there. --67.171.9.211 16:07, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Various changes
Just wanted to say that I wouldn't have usually made the broad changes to an article like that without some consultation with the original authors. However as it is now a featured article (with a linked spike in readers) and a feel/hope that my changes will benefit the readability of the article I went ahead and made them. Also the section on mechanical billboards might well benefit from more eyes, I'm not sure if my rewrite helped or hindered the clarity. Really a diagram is what is needed. Pasd 20:44, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- I love your changes actually, they were uniformly excellent. I wasn't a big fan of subheadings before, but you have converted me :) IMO, the mechanical billboards section is more readable. I struggled with the words for the tri-facing billboards in the first place; as you say, it's the sort of thing you can only get into someone's head with a diagram. --Jkeiser 02:38, Jun 25, 2004 (UTC)
[edit] timing is everything
The Billboard Liberation Front just did an 'improvement' yesterday night.
www.billboardliberation.com/robot.html
Milton Rand Kalman BLF Chief Scientist
[edit] Billboard advertisements are designed to catch a person's attention and create a memorable impression very quickly
Only half-jokingly, I propose this: www.robertaweb.com/. Very effective campaign, with huge billboards (> 5 meters high) too. Not for a family-oriented site, though
What's with the whatsnewkhan.ytmnd.com/ link for "Court vs. William Shatner, 1979?" Kinda random.
[edit] Political billboards
In the UK, during general election campaigns, all parties use billboards for political adverts. Does this not happen anywhere else? Morwen - Talk 00:33, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- I've never seen it in the US. Acegikmo1 19:29, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)
-
- It happens occasionally - I've seen it. →Raul654 19:35, Jul 4, 2004 (UTC)
How many billboards do people really remember? I would submit, that it is very few. I can only remember 2 in my life time and I am 93.
[edit] made a few changes
I am one of the people who worked on the software for the Yahoo Autos racing game. Just made a few minor edits -- the sign in question is actually on the Reuters building and the ad actually only ran for a few weeks during the New York auto show. Also the caption for the Times Square photo said "sports billboards" -- not sure why it said that since when it doesn't have games on it, the Reuters sign shows all kinds of news, not just sports. Thanks for featuring our sign!
[edit] bolding?
Eh, what's with all the recent random bolding of sentences and words? Is there some Wikipedia convention I'm unaware of? Jkeiser 17:41, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
- It is probably someone that is not familiar with the Wikipedia style manual. I have reverted it. mydogategodshat 20:34, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Bus advertising
Could the advertising on the sides of local buses be called billboard advertising? If not, what would it appear as in Wikipedia? See my example below. Peter Ellis 21:35, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Answer -- Side of a bus advertising. Peter Ellis 15:54, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Or simply Bus advertising. *grin* Ckamaeleon 03:40, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] stadium billboards
original text: Apparently, billboards in stadiums are called advertising boards.
- Does any sentence beginning with "apparently" belong in Wiklpedia? That's not exactly the encyclopedic tone we're going for here. This statement should either be substantiated or removed. Ckamaeleon 03:39, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Magic Vinyl Printing link?
Seems like the link to magicvinylprinting.com should be labeled as a commercial site, or omitted.
(As a side note, that's one of the most badly-designed websites I've seen. Wikipedia linking to it almost undermines the authority of the article, in my opinion.)
[edit] US POV?
Regarding the worldwide and uspov tags put up on the site.. I personally feel the article does a fine job of providing world-wide information on billboards. It just so happens that many highlights in billboard history happened in America. Maybe we can add notes to some of the historical highlights that don't yet say they happened in the U.S. Anyone is welcome to add more non-American historical highlights (and I'm American, so it won't be me), but I feel the ones there are all valuable. I say take these cleanup tags out. --Vossanova o< 18:00, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- Actually, I've been trying to find some cites for a fair bit of non-US info to go into the article - roadside billboards are banned near motorways in the United Kingdom, for example, so farmers are now illegally parking trailers painted with the advertisements in their fields ajoining motorways. If anyone can think of a good way to integrate this into the article, it may go some way to allieviating these concerns. Laïka 15:18, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
