Talk:Understatement

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Linguistics

	Linguistics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

References in Classical Literature?[edit]

The article cites a scene from Monty Python's "The Meaning of Life", but can any contributer think of an example in classical literature in which understatement is prominently used? Perhaps as a form or vehicle of satire?

Possible Vandalism[edit]

I removed the following line believing it was vandalism:

Event: Tom O'Gara's 30th Birthday Party at the VFW in Somerville, MA. June 16th, 2007. Danielle Reddy said "Saturday's going to be... interesting."

If you have a defense for this line being included please speak up.

Childoferna

Other languages[edit]

Why aren't understatements used in other languages?-195.240.115.59 (talk) 12:00, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They probably are --according to this blog, they show up in French humor as "litotes": http://www.newyorkinfrench.net/profiles/blogs/amusebouche-no-5-whats-litotes betsythedevine (talk) 18:41, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Google example[edit]

I removed the following example:

The unofficial Google slogan, "Don't be evil", is another example of understatement, where one might expect something stronger, more akin to "always be good". The slogan is meant to be a humorous jab at its competitors.

It seems to me that the slogan means exactly what it says and is not an example of understatement. In any case, it was unsourced and perhaps original research, so I felt free to remove it. Zvd (talk) 03:32, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I really, really hope Google strives for higher ethical standards than simply just "Don't be evil." The intended humor of "Don't be evil" is incontrovertible, and the source of humor is from understatement. It's no a howler, but it is humorous. The intent here is to demonstrate that other companies with apparently strong ethics policies aren't even ethical enough to have a slogan imploring their employees to foreswear evil. Well, now Google does. Reinserted example, adding a source from blogoscoped verifying the humorous intent, the same source currently referenced from "Don't be evil" entry. Anon 02:55, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Japanese Emperor's Surrender Broadcast[edit]

"the war situation has developed not necessarily to Japan's advantage"

If that is not the definitive understatement, I don't know what is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.106.2.209 (talk) 06:29, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dr Livingstone, I presume[edit]

I don't think this is an understatement at all. An understatement in the example cited would be something like, "You don't see many white people around here." I'm afraid of changing this article because it will get "corrected" by someone who doesn't seem to have a clue about the subject. The Japanese surrender broadcast was previously removed even though that is perfect. The google slogan is not an example of an understatement at all. If the Nazis say "We've been naughty" that is an understatement. If Mahatma Gandhi says, "I'm fairly peaceful" that is an understement. "Don't be Evil" is not an understatement. This section was removed, but some clueless person reinstated it. If I remove it, they'll just out it back in. This article is hopeless. Now that is an understatement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.106.2.209 (talk) 09:27, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]