Talk:I Love New York/Archives/2012

ethnic diversity?
"especially as a center of cultural and ethnic diversity" Does it really celebrate ethnic diversity? Lotsofissues 04:10, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

This should be moved back to I Love New York

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

Why don't you just put the image in place of the text? Language should describe, not recreate, image, and should be able to be both spoken and written. The article should be moved to "I Love New York", as ♥ is not a character in the latin alphabet. It's punctuation as decoration (I actually give it more credit than it deserves... it's not even punctuation) in an attempt to recreate the logo image. Here's an article dealing with the issue. Notice that reputable publications refer to the campaign as "I Love New York". And, in fact, the state self-identifies the campaign as "I LOVE NEW YORK". Text is text. Image is image. The two shouldn't be mixed in a non-artistic setting. – flamurai (t) 18:32, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't see the issue personally. The only thing is that I Love New York might be the common name, but in fact it isn't. - Ta bu shi da yu 21:41, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The issue is that the heart isn't a letter or punctionation. It's a picture. If you could put Prince at [[Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg]] (assuming that was still his "official" name), would you do it? – flamurai (t) 22:01, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
 * ♥ is in fact a Unicode character. If Prince's name was still [[Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg]], and that was a standard character, than it might well be appropriate. Dforest 07:56, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, that's not even the issue. This issue is in this case, there is a clear, preferred English-language name, and we, as an encyclopedia (an entity based primarily on language) should prefer to use actual language in our text instead of drawing pictures (which is essentially what you are doing by trying to recreate the logo). – flamurai (t) 22:05, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
 * It is a rebus. Rebuses are no doubt a form of written language. Dforest 07:56, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Not to mention screen readers won't properly read the heart character. Encyclopedias are about language. I am moving the page. – flamurai (t) 05:24, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * That's why the parenthetic description - "(Heart symbol)" is there. BTW, screen readers can be configured to read the heart.Dforest 07:56, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I have rolled back inappropriately, apologies. I should have reverted. Therefore, I have rolled myself back again and have done a normal revert. I do not agree with the rewrite to remove the heart character. I don't mind renaming it to "I love New York" though. - Ta bu shi da yu 06:52, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree, I don't feel strongly against the renaming to "I Love New York" if there is a good reason to do so, but I do feel the heart symbol belongs in the article. The symbol is quite necessary for properly indicating the rebus. Dforest 07:56, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * But not the English language. – flamurai (t) 16:56, 21 March 2006 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move - back to "I (heart) NY"

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 


 * I believe when I moved it, it was proper. It's the name, you'll never see I Love New York. Just I ♥ NY. I think it should be moved back regardless of wether the character is part of the English Language or not. --FlareNUKE 00:40, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support and make "I L/love New York", "I L/love NY", "I H/heart New York" and "I H/heart NY" redirect to it. Regards, David Kernow 03:24, 25 June 2006 (UTC) via WP:RM, converted to vote 12:10, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose that, the song is "I love New York", that goes with the commercial. 132.205.44.134 05:43, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
 * It should be I ♥ NY. That is the correct way to spell it, just like Wikipedia list the video game "We ♥ Katamari" using the heart symbol since that is the correct name. TJ Spyke 04:46, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support per TJ Spyke, but surely "I L/love New York" should be just for the song (naturally, with a disambig link at the top to "I ♥ NY")? Lusanaherandraton 07:58, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Noone will ever type "I ♥ NY" into a search box.  Just because there's a symbol somewhere in Unicode for "♥", doesn't mean it's not clearly used as a graphical logo here.--Pharos 08:05, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Then have a redirect, its not impossible. Philc  TECI 12:07, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, see above. Regards, David Kernow 12:10, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
 * The point is, "I ♥ NY" is not the name of this advertizing campaign; "♥" is just a symbol in Unicode that happens to resemble the graphics used in the logo. We should be using the common name in text here, not making an attempt to represent a graphical logo in Unicode.  To quote from the guideline: "When choosing a name for a page ask yourself: What word would the average user of the Wikipedia put into the search engine?"--Pharos 19:44, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I thought this article was about the logo...? Meanwhile, here's another thought: Rather than assume that "I ♥ NY" means "I love NY" or the like, use redirects such as those suggested above (plus more?) to handle the various keyboard-entered possibilities. They can all point to the more accurate "I ♥ NY". Regards, David 03:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Jonathunder 21:20, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Result:no move
4-3 in favour, not enough to change it back. -- Kim van der Linde at venus 21:16, 5 July 2006 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Another Move Proposal

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 


 * Now I've noticed that they've even coloured the heart red and use it through the whole article. There's no reason the title should stay now. --FlareNUKE 01:15, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. Have all the other uses redirect to "I ♥ NY". With regards to typing in the heart character: No one without a Polish keyboard is going to bother clicking the "łę" in Lech Wałęsa either. I'd wager most people don't type capital letters in search engines, either. --SigPig 17:02, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * It would be better if Walesa were spelled in English letters, too, but that's a different battle. Bubba ditto 00:20, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Oppose. We shouldn't be writing things with funny symbols.  Manual of Style (trademarks) also discourages special formatting.  Dragons flight 20:35, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Support, this is no different than having articles with special characters like é and ñ. TJ Spyke 21:43, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I think it’s quite different. Those characters are an established part of written language. and they’re letters, not symbols that stand in place of other legitimate words. The ñ is even part of some actual alphabets. --Rob Kennedy 19:23, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Support (alternatively, I♥NY) avoid using special characters that are not pronounced and are included purely for decoration does not apply here. ~ trialsanderrors 08:07, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose the song is "I Love New York" 132.205.45.148 17:39, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose; the coloring is an even more flagrant abuse. --Rob Kennedy 19:23, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
 * The official slogan is "I ♥ New York", even the official New York Tourism website uses only that. Anybody saying oppose should go to I ♥ Huckabees and suggest moving that too. TJ Spyke 05:28, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * The tourism site doesn’t use that slogan. It uses the logo in display areas, but I see no places where it uses the heart symbol in body copy. Can you provide a more specific reference? And when it does use the logo, it’s the four-character version; it uses “NY,” not “New York.” I’d love to see the Huckabees page changed to “I Heart Huckabess,” but that page has already had a lengthy discussion on the topic and resolved to keep it with the symbol. The issue was raised on this page just two months ago. In court, you might hear a lawyer say, “Objection, your honor: Asked and answered.” The only new evidence in support of the move is that someone made the hearts red; how is that relevant? --Rob Kennedy 07:08, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I know I'm several months late to this discussion, but I thought I'd comment for the good of the order. You bring up a good point: this is a logo, not text. To render it as "I♥NY" (or even worse, "I ♥ New York," which exists nowhere in popular culture) is both improper and does an injustice to Glaser's work. Unless there is a way to render it as
 * I ♥
 * NY
 * in the URL, which is impossible, there is no logical reason to include the heart character in the Wikipedia title. It is read and spoken as "I love New York," not "I heart New York" or "I love Enn Why." Also, Wikipedia has a guideline about naming articles in mixed case letters for non-acronym names, even when a company (such as Sirius radio) renders it in all caps (SIRIUS) in their logo. I would think the same logic would apply here. (As an aside, is the logo ever "misread" as "I heart New York"? I've only ever heard it spoken that way intentionally for ironic or comedic effect, not as an honest mistake.) --Birdhombre 01:05, 23 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Bubba ditto 00:20, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Support per SigPig. Edgecution 22:46, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The official NY Tourism web site uses it as a LOGO, not as a NAME (notice the title of that page in your browser is "I LOVE NEW YORK", and in TEXT it uses "ILOVENY"). There is a difference. We should not be attempting to recreate images in text. – flamurai (t) 23:45, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Google test. This just made me find another reason not to use the heart... Google doesn't recognize it. It's just ignored. – flamurai (t) 23:51, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
 * It also doesn't search grave letters either. --FlareNUKE 18:11, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Not true. It ignores the accent, meaning è is treated as e. ♥ is just treated as if it didn't exist. – flamurai (t)


 * What happen? Any result? --FlareNUKE 23:24, 18 October 2006 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

no consensus. &mdash; hence no move.

font?
Anyone know of the particular font used in the design?

While I do ask out of my own curiosity, I think a section on the design specifics and such could serve the article well. Everdred 19:43, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * It appears to be based on American Typewriter (medium weight), but I don't think it's exactly the same; it might be condensed a little. --Birdhombre 13:05, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

cat?
Is there a category or something for city advertising? Or some easy way to help readers to find their way from here to Glasgow's miles better etc.? --Doric Loon 15:37, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Para-literacy?
"...icon that unabashedly promotes the metropolitan pride of New York State." What can one say? --Wetman (talk) 15:44, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that line was wrong on quite a few levels. I've tried to clean up/clarify that section.--Pharos (talk) 19:07, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Interesting topic.... boring topic
I know everyone loves the iconic logo (interesting topic), but the primary subject of this article should really be the New York State tourism campaign (boring topic).--Pharos (talk) 18:58, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

New Logo (2008)
I found the "new logo" somewhere on the internet http://www.logoblog.org/wordpress/new-york-to-iconic-logo-drop-dead/ Do you think someone should add it on the page? 216.155.158.183 (talk) 23:34, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Song
This article has incoming links for the song and it is included in categories as a song, even this talk page has a Wikiproject Songs link... so why is it that the song, its history, composer, etc. aren't mentioned anywhere? --Ashanda (talk) 08:49, 4 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Since nobody replied to me here, I figured that eventhough 30 odd people are listed as watching this article, maybe they're not watching it consistently (been guilty of that myself). Anyway I decided to dig into the article history and lo and behold, whole sections that had been removed by incomplete vandalism reversions! I restored them, added some material, and rearranged things a bit too. --Ashanda (talk) 22:38, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Problems with referencing
Unfortunatly, I do not currently have access to references needed to perform major fixes to this article which are sorely needed. The major problem seems to be that it is unclear from where most of the text of this article has come from, some of it may have come from some of the external links, but I cannot find sources for much of it. If anyone has a good idea of where this text came from, please feel free to add references, or leave notes here, and I will do my best to improve the article. -- Jayron  32  18:44, 7 October 2011 (UTC)