Talk:List of world expositions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did You Know An entry from List of world expositions appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 20 July 2006.
Wikipedia
Former featured article candidate This article is a former featured list candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination failed. Once the objections have been addressed you may resubmit the article for featured list status.

Isn't the term 'world fair', not 'world's fair'? 84.70.18.162 22:59, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

It's a fair of the world, hence, world's fair. See World's Fair Joe I 23:50, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Cost

What is the default currency denoted in the 'cost' column? Bastin 00:33, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Expo 88

Shouldn't Expo 88 (Melbourne, Australia) be part of this list? --Ozzykhan 19:48, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

It's being discused to make this list comply with the on World's Fair, which includes Expo '88. Joe I 19:49, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Scope

Vis-a-vis Expo 88 as well, I'm concerned that this article is titled "world's expositions" but only lists "sanctioned world's expositions". Either this should be merged with List of world's fairs or it should be renamed something with BIE in the title. --Dhartung | Talk 21:49, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Name

It seems like World's Fair has an apostrophe, but World Exposition usually does not. Compare 9,670 Google results for World's Exposition versus 448,000 Google results for World Exposition. Note also the title for the Expo 2005 page. I won't move the article, unless someone seconds that. -- tariqabjotu (joturner) 05:21, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, definitely agree here. AP and most other news outlets use "World's Fairs", but "World Expositions". I am in favor of a move. --LV (Dark Mark) 20:29, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
I don't understand why there is a difference between "World's Fairs" and "World's Expositions". Why one should be apostrpied and not the other. They're both plural, both possesive. If you can give a difinitive reason why, besides "they're doing it", I wouldn't be opposed. Joe I 06:13, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
Well, as far as I can tell, the official name is a "International Registered Exhibition (or World Exhibition)"[1]. So should we just use that? I think we ought to use what is commonly accepted. And according to the google stats provided by tariqabjotu, and the research I have done on other media sources, it's "World's Fair" ("World's Fairs") and "World Exposition" ("World Expositions"). You can see both of these uses at the "Expo Museum" here (though this is not official). Thoughts? --LV (Dark Mark) 21:02, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, so what to name it?

  1. List of World Expositions seems like it would have the most common goggle htis
  2. List of World Exhibitions or
  3. List of International Exhibitions - this is the usage on BIE site minus registered

Joe I 22:36, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Move made Joe I 20:03, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of world's fairs

I am not sure of the distinction between the older article List of world's fairs and this article. Should they be merged, or a clearer differentiation made for the general reader? --mervyn 07:59, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

The distinction is the smaller "specialized" fairs have been left out, other wise we would have a list half a mile long. here it was decided that the list be made to incorperate all fairs listed in World's fair. Joe I 06:15, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
I take the point about length -- we just need to explain why some things aren't included, and where to look for others. I also think the first para is very muddly, so will see how I can help. --mervyn 07:27, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
Sure, that was the best I could seperate things. If you can imporve, please feel free. Joe I 22:31, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Atlanta?

Wasn't the Atlanta Cotton States and International Exposition of 1895 a world's fair? This is where Booker T. Washington made his famous Atlanta Compromise speech. Dmoon1 19:26, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Making year more prominent

Currently one can barely see the year, because it's in smaller type then the other columns, plus surrounded by months. Since the exact dates of each exposition can also be found in the detailed articles, I propose to make the year normal size, remove the month, and place the whole column in first place. Anybody disagree? Peter S. 20:47, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

  • I've moved the date column to the first position and increased it to normal size. I haven't changed the months, though. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:24, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 1964 New York World's Fair

This fair was not sanactioned by the BIE; but it appears on the list. Shouldn't it be removed? Jvsett 09:35, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

I would think so (even though it is a fond memory of my childhood). - Jmabel | Talk 06:29, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
I have gone ahead and removed it, as it was not an BIE fair. Jvsett (talk) 16:13, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Not comprehensive?

Mr. Ken Jennings himself states that this list (which he relied on to his detriment) is missing many Expos that are listed at the BIE Web Site. BuddingJournalist 16:02, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Links

Why are some of the expositions (e.g. Brussels 1910) not linked? Wouldn't any world exposition inherently be notable enough for an article? - Jmabel | Talk 06:29, 31 December 2007 (UTC)