Portal talk:Current events/2007 February 17

February 2007
With all due respect to our anonymous editor, Britney Spears' haircut does not have international significance. I support keeping it out of the current events list. Thanks, Antandrus (talk) 02:20, 18 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Britney Spears is a pop music artist who has performed in concerts all over the globe, and has sold her music globally as well; her actions do appeal to people internationally 69.119.239.138 02:34, 18 February 2007 (UTC)


 * how many people are likely to die because of the haircut?Geni


 * resulting deaths are irrelevant, wiki policy re: current events: "trends and developments are also listworthy." This depicts a trend and development with a global pop star 69.119.239.138 02:39, 18 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I still don't see the significance. It's a personal peculiarity.  She's famous, but thousands of famous people do silly things all the time.  (I know it's on CNN, and I'm not making fun of you.)  It is significant as far as U.S.-centric celebrity gossip goes, which in my opinion is just not Richter magnitude compared to wars, massacres, genocides, and global crises.  Antandrus  (talk) 03:19, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I disagree with your assumption that current events re: Spears only appeal to the US. Also, there is no wikipedia guideline stating that current events must only be classified as: "wars, massacres, genocides, and global crises." It is an event, regarding a person with international appeal, and is linked to an updated Spears article in wikipedia. Sadly this debate reflects "wikiality" with a "majority rules" policy; a democracy also put Socrates to death; "Democracy has been defined as two wolves and a sheep discussing plans for lunch." You are the administrator/editor, and therefore the "wolf"; so I somehow have to hope you see the facts, not opinion? where is justice in wikipedia? 69.119.239.138 03:32, 18 February 2007 (UTC)


 * No, it's not about murdering Socrates or eating poor non-admin editors for lunch, it's about consensus. If enough people agree with you and make their case persuasively it goes in.  That's called achieving consensus, and it's how Wikipedia works.  I'm not seeing it happening here.  Calling a haircut an "event" on a global scale is just a mite overmuch, don't you think?  Antandrus  (talk) 03:45, 18 February 2007 (UTC)


 * well, Socrates couldn't gain a "consensus" of support either; wheres my hemlock? : ) 69.119.239.138 03:52, 18 February 2007 (UTC)


 * He tried, and gave an awfully good speech along the way. No hemlock here; there's too much work to do and we need all the editors we can get.  :)  Happy editing, Antandrus  (talk) 04:00, 18 February 2007 (UTC)


 * we will also cover elections and major sporting events but some celeb getting a hair cut just aint that significant.Geni 10:05, 18 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I stumbled across this discussion just now, and I find it difficult to think of a legitimate reason for an article regarding Britney Spear's new haircut. That borders on tabloid, in my opinion. Just my two cents on the situation. --黒雲 user:Qaddosh 14:55, 18 February 2007 (UTC)