Talk:NYC Mayor de Blasio ends US presidential campaign

Style question / Twitter handles in quotes

Should Twitter handles such as "@BilldeBlasio" be replaced with the real name in brackets, "[Bill de Blasio]" when they appear in a statement from Twitter used as a quote in a news article? Fox did not, but NBC chopped up the quote to avoid the issue. I think it looks rather ugly if not unprofessional with the ampersand. --SVTCobra 15:23, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

@SVTCobra: I think replacing the ampersand construct with square-bracketed name is reasonable and, indeed, professional-looking. I don't recall we've done that in the past, but I approve. --Pi zero (talk) 20:01, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Done --SVTCobra 20:33, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Review of revision 4514678 [Passed]

Revision 4514678 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 22:05, 21 September 2019 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: None added. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Revision 4514678 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 22:05, 21 September 2019 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: None added. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

@Pi zero: NYC? Sigh.
103.254.128.98 (talk) 14:50, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Yes, google it! It's very widely used. --SVTCobra 14:58, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

For the people who life in the first world nations. Just because "googling" "BLR" gives the result "Bangalore" does not make it okay to use in a enwn headline.
103.254.128.98 (talk) 15:12, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Except "BLR" doesn't give that result until page three. Odds are, if a person doesn't know what NYC stands for, then they haven't heard of New York, either. --SVTCobra 15:23, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

No, NYC isn't that common. We're generally hawkish about not using initialisms in headlines, with a very few exceptions of which NYC is not one. I'd have changed it if I'd noticed. I missed it.

It would make sense for a review assistant to flag out initialisms in headlines. Reviewers are likely to read article text many times, but headlines only once or twice, which makes it remarkably easy to missing headline defects. (Another point I was just thinking about recently is that a review assistant could flag out when the {{date}} template argument is about to be changed on publication, since this may call for user intervention to adjust relative dates.) --Pi zero (talk) 15:38, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
'Except "BLR" doesn't give that result until page three'. Well, no shit. Google uses your location to provide results which others won't see. Oh, and I know people who want to go to the New York City, but don't know what "NYC" means. Not everyone reduces everything to acronyms. See WN:Headline, length was not an issue here.
103.254.128.98 (talk) 15:43, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

NYC is an unambiguous initialism. One would be hard pressed to find it used for anything else. "I know people" is an absolutely useless testimonial. NYC used on India Express. NYC used in Outlook India. NYC used in Hindustan Times. Need I go on? --SVTCobra 16:08, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

There is no need for further squabbling on the point. We don't recognize NYC as an initialism we allow in headlines, and it was an oversight. It's not so astoundingly horrible as to call for a post-publish rename that would cause duplicate entries in feeds; even having no idea what it stands for doesn't altogether undermine the headline, whose other elements can carry it pretty well; but we avoid it if we don't slip up. And we move on. --Pi zero (talk) 16:23, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

So completely ignoring the part where you don't follow WN:Headline? Or use a biased tool? Or make the mistakes of MSM? Learn from it, make a mental note, and try to not do that again.
103.254.128.98 (talk) 16:29, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Learn/note/try is what I'm saying, yes. Including what makes such oversights more likely and what might be tweaked in our procedures (even, tweaked later on) to further reduce their likelihood (since "try harder", when one is already trying hard, often isn't enough). --Pi zero (talk) 16:38, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Per policy: Avoid jargon and meaningless acronyms. NYC is not a meaningless acronym. I have amply demonstrated that. I don't need your passive-aggressive lecturing. I don't know what this is supposed to be. Some kind of faux social justice? Did you google NYC on your end? Tell us what the result was when it is 'biased' in your favor. Or do I need to use a VPN to simulate the results? There's absolutely no reason for NYC to not be considered an acceptable initialism. --SVTCobra 16:44, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
So let's get influenced by MSM's mistakes, or biased Google results and put BVB/Man U/FCB/PSG/Arg/Juve in the enwn titles? Why is it so hard for you to accept life outside the US just don't care for those acronyms which the first world adores.
103.254.128.98 (talk) 18:04, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

You claim bias and "mistakes", yet you have failed to demonstrate either. The world is not defined by "people you know". wikt:NYC, w:NYC. --SVTCobra 18:09, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

BOTH OF YOU PLEASE STOP. This is getting out of hand. IP is being needlessly melodramatic, while SVT is apparently being driven to over-defend an initialism the SG would discourage using in a headline. The SG recommends this test for using an initialism in a headline: either the initialism is more common than the full name, or the full name is prohibitively long. So we could have done better. Hopefully, we will do better on various future occasions. Nothing more needs to be said. --Pi zero (talk) 18:19, 22 September 2019 (UTC)