| ▲ | anonymars 11 hours ago |
| Is metonymy really so unreasonable in this title? |
|
| ▲ | Timwi 11 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| You have it exactly right. I read the title the way it was intended and I think the complaint was pedantic. |
| |
| ▲ | notahacker 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | I doubt there's anyone in the small group of people that actually need to care about the distinction between EU and ESA spacecraft who doesn't already know this is an ESA mission anyway, and if such a person exists they can probably read as far as the first four words... |
|
|
| ▲ | ifwinterco 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| In theory this could be about Roscosmos since they're based in Moscow |
|
| ▲ | donohoe 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| “North America puts man on the moon” Yes. Yes it is. |
| |
| ▲ | anonymars 11 hours ago | parent [-] | | Now let's evaluate "America puts man on moon" | | |
| ▲ | graemep 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Its a common term for the USA that has no other meaning. The content is North America, the two continents are the Americas. No ambiguity. Europe properly means the continent so it is far more like saying "North America puts man on moon" than saying "America puts man on moon". Ambiguity is always bad. Some people say its clear, but I am sure a lot of others thought an EU agency reconnected with a spacecraft. Its interesting that people get so upset about asking for correct and unambiguous language. | | |
| ▲ | wat10000 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | “America” has no other meaning? So USA means United States of USA? | | | |
| ▲ | close04 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > Its a common term for the USA that has no other meaning Except, you know, the only “other” meaning of “America” is just literally the alternative name for Americas, both continents. Here is an obscure link to the description [0]. Even if you want to refer to North America, what about Mexico and Canada? The less you know, the less ambiguous it is. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americas |
| |
| ▲ | embedding-shape 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Didn't think it was possible, but yes, you made it even worse. | | |
| ▲ | anonymars 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | A good title is brief and clear. "'Miracle': European Space Agency reconnects with lost spacecraft" is long. "'Miracle': ESA reconnects with lost spacecraft" is opaque. The first four words of the article are, "The European Space Agency..." | | |
| ▲ | close04 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | ESA is one of the largest space agencies in the world. There’s nothing opaque about calling it ESA especially in a title. We wouldn’t use initialisms if everything had to be expanded all the time. | | |
| ▲ | anonymars 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | So is Roscosmos, but in such a situation, "Russia reconnects with lost spacecraft" would be the more accessible title |
|
|
|
|
|
