Talk:Slogans and terms derived from the September 11 attacks
Previous discussions without headers
[edit]"Let's Roll" wasn't Todd Beamer's last words, this is explained on the Let's Roll page, i've changed the line that said that, also i've made the word's "Let's roll" a link to the wiki
yeah, i was gonna say, i think its been around longer than that too
Ground Zero
[edit]The term "Ground Zero" originated long before the WTC attack. As such, the following text has been removed from the article:
"* Ground Zero – the area of the disaster recovery effort, covering Lower Manhattan around the site of the World Trade Center complex"
--Ckatzchatspy 09:32, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, of course the term originated long ago. But I'd say that it now has a default meaning which is did not have previously. If one is in a conversation which is not about 9/11, and he mentions "Ground Zero", the other people would not respond by asking "Ummm, ground zero of which bomb?". Rather they'd understand that the speaker is now talking about 9/11. If other people agree with me, then this term should be reinstated into the article. --Keeves 13:14, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
- I'd have to disagree with you on that point. If you're a New York City resident, then the WTC attack would probably be your first association. Globally, however, it's a different story. In a similar vein, "9/11" has a specific meaning to Americans now - but not to the entire world. In Canada, for example, we can certainly make the association between "9/11" and the terrorist attacks when it's used in context. However, you're more likely to hear the events referred to on the news as "the World Trade Center attack" etc. In many parts of the world, "9/11" doesn't even mean "September 11th" - it means "November 9th". --Ckatzchatspy 16:22, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
- I can certainly see your point, but doesn't it mean that "jumper" and "the bathtub" need to be removed as well? --Keeves 17:24, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
- "The Bathtub", with both words capitalized, is pretty specific (as opposed to the generic term "bathtub"), and there is an article linked that explains the term. "Jumper", on the other hand, is most definitely not primarily associated with the WTC incident, as the linked article demonstrates. The word was in widespread use long before 11 September, including the idea of jumping from buildings. However, the term "WTC jumper" - already in the article - is new, so I've adjusted the sentence to reflect your point. --Ckatzchatspy 21:37, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
- I can certainly see your point, but doesn't it mean that "jumper" and "the bathtub" need to be removed as well? --Keeves 17:24, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
- I'd have to disagree with you on that point. If you're a New York City resident, then the WTC attack would probably be your first association. Globally, however, it's a different story. In a similar vein, "9/11" has a specific meaning to Americans now - but not to the entire world. In Canada, for example, we can certainly make the association between "9/11" and the terrorist attacks when it's used in context. However, you're more likely to hear the events referred to on the news as "the World Trade Center attack" etc. In many parts of the world, "9/11" doesn't even mean "September 11th" - it means "November 9th". --Ckatzchatspy 16:22, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, of course the term originated long ago. But I'd say that it now has a default meaning which is did not have previously. If one is in a conversation which is not about 9/11, and he mentions "Ground Zero", the other people would not respond by asking "Ummm, ground zero of which bomb?". Rather they'd understand that the speaker is now talking about 9/11. If other people agree with me, then this term should be reinstated into the article. --Keeves 13:14, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Despite the above discussion, I believe Ground Zero should be used here because it is today frequently used without qualifier as referring to the WTC site. The term 9/11 didn't originate with the attacks either, having been previously used to refer to IIRC a coup in Chile and just as a reference to the date itself. The term Ground Zero is so closely linked to 9/11 now that to not include it renders this article incomplete. Therefore I have put it back. 68.146.8.46 13:38, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
- Removed again. While it is used with respect to the World Trade Center incident, it is not used exclusively for that purpose, and the term is not automatically associated with the WTC. This is in no way intended to be disrespectful to the people of New York, but we have to keep in mind that Wikipedia has a global audience. --Ckatzchatspy 17:31, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
- Disagree - Mention Ground Zero, NYC outside the United States and the reference is still clearly 9/11. It's the context of how the term is used, so a reference to "ground zero" in the middle of a discussion of Hiroshima would be presumed to be a World War II reference while the same "ground zero" term in a NY-related context would not. Another slogan which might be of note is United We Stand, depicted on memorials with (in the US) a US flag alone or (outside the US) a US flag and a local flag intertwined. --66.102.80.212 (talk) 01:33, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Other Terms
[edit]Should Patriot Act (as well as other legislation invented in the wake of 9/11) be included under the US Government's invented terms? Also, what about derivatives of the phrase "...or the terrorists will win"? What about "Mission Accomplished"? Or would that be more about Iraq? Oneultralamewhiteboy (talk) 03:01, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
Proposed merge to Iconography of 9-11
[edit]Following a proposed merge of Iconography of 9-11 to the main article, where it was felt that article was already too large, an alternative suggestion was made that Iconography and Slogans and terms should instead be merged together. Since "Iconography..." is a more encyclopedic title than "Slogans and terms derived from..." I have suggested that the latter be merged into Iconography of 9-11. However, if anyone can come up with a better title and we merge both articles into it, I would have absolutely no problem with that.
Incidentally, it seems to me that getting rid of "derived from" in the title would help with issues such as those driving the discussion above! As a South African, let me just say that I am aware that the use of "Ground Zero" is quite often associated with the attacks of 11 September, so I would say that there is some reason to list it among "terms and slogans" in spite of the fact that its original derivation was from elsewhere. David_FLXD (Talk) 05:57, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
Done merged with slogans article into a new article called Cultural influence of 9-11, which is tied into the main article via Wikipedia:Summary style at September 11 attacks#Cultural The Transhumanist 21:03, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
