Talk:Battle of Seattle (disambiguation)

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

United States: Washington

	United States portal This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
	This disambiguation page is supported by WikiProject Washington.

1999[edit]

The current text for the first entry is confusing. It reads:

Battle of Seattle (1999) — The civil unrest that occurred in Seattle, Washington, on November 30, 1999, in connection with the WTO meeting being held at the Washington State Convention and Trade Center

However, Battle of Seattle (1999) and WTO Meeting of 1999 both go to the same place, eventually, which is WTO Ministerial Conference of 1999; however the Battle of Seattle (1999) route goes past the seemingly useless WTO Meeting of 1999 page, which is just a redirect. So, uh, I'm going to change it. If I'm treading on any toes here let me know, I'm pretty new here. Thanks. Kiaparowits 19:46, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I changed it, but I'm still not very happy with it. I seems like the article should be named something other than WTO Ministerial Conference of 1999, because it doesn't actually talk that much about the conference. I guess Battle of Seattle is too POV? That's certainly how I hear it most commonly reffered to, by left and right alike (but that may just be where I live).

More talk at WTO Ministerial Conference of 1999.Kiaparowits 19:59, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

We've been through a lot of refactoring over that article; there was some (mostly POV) material about street actions around conference that I think was originally at Battle of Seattle, probably by someone unaware that there had been an actual battle here in 1856. And we just haven't had anyone write much yet about the events of the Ministerial itself.

However, I think the old description (although too verbose for a disambiguation page) was more accurate, even if the links perhaps didn't go where they should. Battle of Seattle refers to the civil unrest surrounding the Ministerial, not to the Ministerial itself. This is a case of disambiguation to a title that is not a synonym but is simply the place where the topic is covered within an article on something else. I'd like to change it (mostly) back to "you may be looking for information on: The civil unrest that occurred in Seattle, Washington, in connection with the WTO Meeting of 1999. Any problem with that? -- Jmabel | Talk 18:00, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm with you Jmabel --Lukobe 22:07, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That's OK with me. Your proposal is more accurate. Perhaps when there is more information about the agenda of the Ministerial, I will re-evaluate breaking it into two articles.Kiaparowits 04:33, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Don't forget there's also to be a Battle in Seattle (film)] article at some point ("in" not "of") soon after or before its release cf its imdb page, so this disambig page will have one more entry; maybe there's gonna be a video game, or is already who knows...most southbound Canucks on I-5 would associate the term with making it through Seattle during rush hour...I did some background for the flick; it was shot in Vancouver but they did import real veterans of the original battle in busloads from Seattle, like 1500 of them or something (they worked for free, so no work visas needed for Canada and a special deal with the film unions about it...Skookum1 08:14, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]