News talk:RBW 2008 hits 100 registrations

I don't think the title of this article is good enough as it is. The "century" part is confusing (I assume it refers to the 100 tickets, but still), and it's just very unprofessional overall. Spaz Kitty 00:40, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * How many real news articles actually explain themselves without reading the article? I'm still well off finishing the article, which I assume is probably why it seems unprofessional, ie. the placeholders to remind me of what I was going to put where and the XX for me to fill in later with the number of platinum tickets and the spelling mistakes. Or if you're referring to the main bulk of text that's already there, I'd love to know why so I can change it. Axle
 * A headline is still meant to provide an easy summation of the main theme of the article, and 'hits a century' makes it sound like it's 100 years old -- nothing to do with the actual topic of breaching 100 members. Spaz Kitty 02:28, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll concede I could rethink the title as I see where it may be slightly misleading, but I'm still at a loss as to what is so unprofessional about the article, especially as it's not even a first draft yet. Axle 02:31, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I was referring to the title as unprofessional, not the article itself. Both the colloquialism and the exclamation point (punctuation aside from commas is typically a no-no in headlines) should probably go. Spaz Kitty 02:35, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll concede 'century' is probably a little linguistically specific to the UK as a term for 100, however your original comment also made it sound like you were reffering to the article overall as unprofessional, however now I know the title would be misleading I can get that changed once I'm finished with the body. Axle 02:44, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Moved to better titled page, free to be deleted as seen fit. Axle 03:54, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * If you want to move pages, please use the "Move" tab. Cutting and pasting messes up the edit history a bit. :-) --GreenReaper(talk) 17:15, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I think that parts of it sound more like promotion rather than a WikiFur News story. The actual facts covered are fine, but phrases like "huge success" (which is later repeated), "seems set to be much larger than anyone could have anticipated", "numerous extras" and perhaps even "talented" give an overly positive tone that would fit a promotional post by the event organizers. They are out of place here. WikiFur's editors may have opinions, but ideally WikiFur itself should not. It is fine to communicate that others have positive opinions of the event and its success in garnering registrations, but this should be conveyed through attributed quotes (e.g. "X said that Y"; "X is 'the best furry convention in the world', according to Y").
 * I suggest looking at these two news stories and similar news items for examples of WikiFur News style. A good rule of thumb is to think about whether or not you'd expect to see that kind of wording in something like The Guardian, the Financial Times or BBC News. --GreenReaper(talk) 17:41, 11 March 2008 (UTC)