Template talk:SEA Games
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
OK, this template is unwieldy to point of being laughable. I've converted this to look like {{Panamgames}} since "Manila / Laguna / Cebu / Bacolod / Tagaytay / Subic / Angeles 2005" is rather stupid-looking. Either place the year only or the country + year. --Howard the Duck 10:39, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
- Current version doesnt really aid navigation. The name of the country should be there. yea, but not the name of the cities. kawaputratorque 09:58, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, but I am dead against the change from city to country. We refer to multi-disciplinary events like this by their host city and not country. Do you refer to China 2008 or Beijing 2008, even thou some events are held outside Beijing, including as far away as Hong Kong?--Huaiwei (talk) 11:32, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- How many events will be held in Beijing and HK? Compare that to 2005 where every locale had at least 3 sports. --Howard the Duck 11:34, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- Another way to solve this is to use the logos. 2007 used "Nakton Ratchasima" while 2005 and 2003 used the country names (events were split into 2 or more host cities). 2003 used "Kuala Lumpur" (I'm too lazy to look at the others).
- This will be a good way to compromise this, but the problems would be: 1) it will be inconsistend and 2) How about the games in which either had no logos or the logos cannot be obtained? --Howard the Duck 11:37, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- I find it amusing that the very same person who whines about sticking to precedents and conventions and "no original research in presentation" is now insisting on doing something as radical as renaming an entire series of events without any valid references to support his agenda. Conventional wisdom is for the games to be named after the dominant host city where multiple venues exist (which is far more common than imagined, btw.), usually in terms of the number or importance of events held (for example, the opening and closing ceremonies takes precedence). While there are certainly sources referring to the 2005 edition as "Manila 2005", I have yet to find a "Philippines 2005" referring to the Sea Games held in 2005. Care to explain why?--Huaiwei (talk) 12:13, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- LOL. That's why I later remarked on using the logos, since they're the authority for things such as this. 2005 and 2003 used the country names while 2007 used the provincial name, while 2003 used the city name. Nakhon Ratchasima as used in the SEA Games isn't a city.
- Or if you really insist on using cities, then just use one city. The anon used "Manila / Laguna / Cebu / Bacolod / Tagaytay / Subic / Angeles 2005" to label the 2005 games. Certainly no one used "Manila / Laguna / Cebu / Bacolod / Tagaytay / Subic / Angeles SEA Games". But if you'd use Manila, I'd rather suggest to add "Metro" before "Manila" since they're two separate and distinct entities. --Howard the Duck 12:18, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- That is a fair compromise, I must say, although I am also open to renaming particular events insistent on using country names instead, in particular "Vietnam 2003" (even thou many still refers to it as Hanoi 2003 anyway). There is no need to be dead consistent across the board, which is why I disagreed with your strange suggestion of changing all entities to country names just because a few events in recent years are spread across multiple cities. Please also remember that verifiability is more important than technical accuracy as far as wikipedia is concerned. I will remove "Metro" from "Manila 2005" soon if you cannot establish its common usage.--Huaiwei (talk) 12:31, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- All right, you can remove "Metro" from "Metro Manila" although it is sort of incorrect. I was just peeved off by the laughable "Manila / Laguna / Cebu / Bacolod / Tagaytay / Subic / Angeles 2005" example (he should change "Laguna" to "Los Banos" for consistency's sake (LOL)) that's why I rather wanted country names or even the complete removal of the hosts. --Howard the Duck 12:40, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- As I said, technical accuracy is not more important than verifiability as far as wikipedia is concerned. I am certainly aware that the events are actually held across Metro Manila, but if it is not common practise to then refer to the games as Metro Manila 2005, that name will not be used here. I can understand the ridiculousness of that extended event name, but let's not then swing to the other extreme and cut everything down to the barest minimum. This will not help anyone either way.--Huaiwei (talk) 12:31, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- I've already renamed it into "Manila 2005". --Howard the Duck 12:41, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks alot. I am just hoping you would understand the rationale behind this, and not take it personally.--Huaiwei (talk) 15:19, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- As I've said, the whole "Manila / Laguna / Cebu / Bacolod / Tagaytay / Subic / Angeles 2005" stupidity is what I don't want to see. --Howard the Duck 23:31, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- And I said I agree to that. Still, there is no need to then strip everything off as a result, even for venues held in one city. Swinging from one extreme to another is not a sensible thing to do. That is my main message.--Huaiwei (talk) 00:42, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
- As I've said, I merely followed what was done on {{Panamgames}}, since that template looks way neater than this one. And I didn't "strip" everything off, otherwise this template will be empty. --Howard the Duck 00:45, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
- And I said I agree to that. Still, there is no need to then strip everything off as a result, even for venues held in one city. Swinging from one extreme to another is not a sensible thing to do. That is my main message.--Huaiwei (talk) 00:42, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
- As I've said, the whole "Manila / Laguna / Cebu / Bacolod / Tagaytay / Subic / Angeles 2005" stupidity is what I don't want to see. --Howard the Duck 23:31, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks alot. I am just hoping you would understand the rationale behind this, and not take it personally.--Huaiwei (talk) 15:19, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- I've already renamed it into "Manila 2005". --Howard the Duck 12:41, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- As I said, technical accuracy is not more important than verifiability as far as wikipedia is concerned. I am certainly aware that the events are actually held across Metro Manila, but if it is not common practise to then refer to the games as Metro Manila 2005, that name will not be used here. I can understand the ridiculousness of that extended event name, but let's not then swing to the other extreme and cut everything down to the barest minimum. This will not help anyone either way.--Huaiwei (talk) 12:31, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- All right, you can remove "Metro" from "Metro Manila" although it is sort of incorrect. I was just peeved off by the laughable "Manila / Laguna / Cebu / Bacolod / Tagaytay / Subic / Angeles 2005" example (he should change "Laguna" to "Los Banos" for consistency's sake (LOL)) that's why I rather wanted country names or even the complete removal of the hosts. --Howard the Duck 12:40, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- That is a fair compromise, I must say, although I am also open to renaming particular events insistent on using country names instead, in particular "Vietnam 2003" (even thou many still refers to it as Hanoi 2003 anyway). There is no need to be dead consistent across the board, which is why I disagreed with your strange suggestion of changing all entities to country names just because a few events in recent years are spread across multiple cities. Please also remember that verifiability is more important than technical accuracy as far as wikipedia is concerned. I will remove "Metro" from "Manila 2005" soon if you cannot establish its common usage.--Huaiwei (talk) 12:31, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- I find it amusing that the very same person who whines about sticking to precedents and conventions and "no original research in presentation" is now insisting on doing something as radical as renaming an entire series of events without any valid references to support his agenda. Conventional wisdom is for the games to be named after the dominant host city where multiple venues exist (which is far more common than imagined, btw.), usually in terms of the number or importance of events held (for example, the opening and closing ceremonies takes precedence). While there are certainly sources referring to the 2005 edition as "Manila 2005", I have yet to find a "Philippines 2005" referring to the Sea Games held in 2005. Care to explain why?--Huaiwei (talk) 12:13, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Why not just use the official placename designations as used in the logos? The 1999, 2003 and 2005 editions used country names, while the 2007 SEA Games logo uses the province name. Doing so has its merits, as the official designations were used for a reason: Brunei styled the 1999 SEA Games using its full country name as there really was no point in highlighting the fact that it can only host the events mainly in its capital/largest city; 2003 and 2005 used the country names to denote the spreading out of events into two main hubs (Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City) or one main hub with a number of minor hubs (Metro Manila and Tagaytay/Subic Bay/Los Baños/Angeles/Bacolod/Cebu); and, the recent SEA Games was styled using the province name to promote development and tourism in northeast Thailand. I find this more consistent than having to arbitrarily assign a city name just for the sake of conformity. And as it is becoming more likely for future host countries to spread out events across cities to not only avoid congestion and provide better home advantage, but also use the opportunity for self-aggrandizement or promotion of a whole region or the entire country itself, we may very well prepare to see something like Jawa 2011, Johore 2015, Visayas 2019 or Cambodia 2021. — Dakilang Isagani (talk) 13:08, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
