Talk:Commission Regulation (EC) No. 2257/94

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

European Union Low‑importance

	European Union portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the European Union 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.European UnionWikipedia:WikiProject European UnionTemplate:WikiProject European UnionEuropean Union articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

I have moved some material from Euromyth to here. 80.68.82.223 (talk) 00:14, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Applicability of press release

I'm not sure about the applicability of the press release. As can be seen from the lengthy quote, it says nothing about bananas. I presume this is the what in fact led to Commission Regulation 1221/2008, which actually lists which regulations are repealed - and the list does not include 2257/94. Since the press release also mentions 26 products, and lists them, it looks pretty clear that it does not apply to bananas. I have searched for any regulation repealing 2257/94 but could not find anything. Unless the relevance to Regulation 2257/94 can be shown, I think it should be removed, or merely get a passing reference, avoiding any implication that it applies to this regulation. --Boson (talk) 05:31, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have not checked the text of 1221/2008 , but the 23 July 2008 announcement was widely reported as repealing the banana regulation, by both pro- and anti-EU people, e.g.:

* http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/2453204/Bent-banana-and-curved-cucumber-rules-dropped-by-EU.html

* http://www.alynsmith.eu/news/614/80/Bye-To-Bendy-Banana-Ban.html

As such, it is notably relevant to the banana regulation (even if you are correct that ensuing legislation did not apply to bananas).

86.15.111.76 (talk) 14:57, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have re-read the presss release

http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEX/08/0723&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en

and Regulation 1221/2008

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2008:336:0001:0080:en:PDF

Neither mention bananas, as far as I can see. Particularly since this section and the Euromyth article are about misleading and/or badly researched reporting, we have to avoid any impression that Wikipedia is stating as fact that either the press release or the regulation relate to Regulation 2257/94 . However, since the two sources you cited above do (apparently erroneously) relate the two by referring to " bent banana and curved cucumber rules" and "the infamous 'straight banana' ruling", respectively, it may be appropriate to report this in such a way that readers are made aware of the discrepancy and can make up their own minds as to whether this is a case of misleading reporting. The Commission does state somewhere that the banana quality standards regulation still applies. I will add that to the article (with a reference).--Boson (talk) 19:12, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Synonyms

"Bendy banana law", "bendy banana regulation", and "bendy banana directive" do not seem to be used in books. "Bendy banana law" seems to be used loosely and with some frequency in the media. There are also some references to a "bendy banana regulation". There appear to be very few references to a "bendy banana directive", and these may be based on a misconception that this is actually a directive, rather than a regulation (which is largely equivalent to an EU law, since it has direct effect). So I think the one "synonym" bendy banana law is sufficient (and appropriate) in the opening sentence. --Boson (talk) 11:25, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]