(09-24-2024, 09:44 PM)infinitempg Wrote: i won't lie and said i read all of this but wow
when i made the bid for the smoky mountains it was entirely a meme bid because everyone put their bids in tennessee and i thought it'd be funny - if you look at the media i made for it i pretty much just said "because memes", and it won because of the logo. so i definitely understand the frustration that the narrative aspect is lacking.
The gimmick bids aren't my thing, and they never will be my thing, but I am sure some people must think there is something compelling about playing a game of football in the most breathtaking natural wonders of the world. It keeps coming up for a reason, and it keeps winning for a reason. There is a clear demand for these types of games, and I can see why. These areas, irl, are gorgeous, and we want to highlight the elements of the Earth that we find beautiful to the world. The Great Smoky Mountains are beautiful, and there is a sense of romantic wonder of the climax of an already eventful season being resolved in these ancient giants.
My only problem is that, to me, I can't get over how playing a Super Bowl-caliber game would actually destroy these areas. Not just in the physical construction of the stadium, but then also the strain it'd place on nearby infrastructure due to how much of a tourist spectacle these games can become. Too many people coming in at once, who all need accommodations, and will leave a lot of waste behind. I get the intent in wanting to highlight these areas to the world in-character, and other users out of characters, but to me it just seems like an inheritely destructive thing to do and I can never get behind it for that reason.
Quote:the fact that singapore's stadium listing is "singa pura" stadium just feels outright racist to me??? i have no idea who did that or who made up the other names, but we have had a history of users just making stuff up on the wiki and no one really catching them/noticing for long periods of time.
To be mildly fair, "Singa Pura" (usually rendered in one word as Singapura, but you could break it up into its constituent parts) is just how you'd write Singapore in Malay, one of the official languages of the city-state. The name ultimately derives from Sanskrit, a classical Indian language that is to Hinduism what Latin is to Catholicism (back when the city was founded, the area was still Hindu). "Siṃha" is lion, "Pūra" is city, so it literally means "Lion City". The influence of Sanskrit fades as the Malay Archipelago undergoes Islamization, but in this case, the city name largely sticks, just some sounds shifting to be easier to pronounce for Malay speakers. Eventually once the British move in, you get the -pura suffix Anglicized into -pore, like it often did in India itself.
I agree the mishandling of the non-American ultimini locations comes across as racist, but more due to the lack of effort than necessarily the specific name chosen. For the Dutch ultimini, for example, they just list the similarly uninspired "Netherlands Field". Just using the name of the country as the name of the stadium again. The only one I feel is outright malicious was, interestingly enough, Llanfairpwll, which deletes the city name entirely (only identifying it as Wales), and then proclaims it was just played on "some field I guess". Like it is really drooling with contempt for the location there in a way the other ones lack.
Quote:also you joke about plate tectonics and splitting indonesia in half russia-style, but between the plate boundary that cuts through the country and the Wallace Line that gives a clear cut of biogeography you're not too far off lol
Oh, dividing Indonesia in two in terms of placement wasn't meant as a joke. For example, that's how Wikipedia operationalizes Oceania; they include the part of Indonesia on New Guinea as Oceania, and the rest of the country as in Asia. It makes sense; there's no real reason why half of New Guinea should arbitrarily be considered part of Asia, which is still the traditional view. I just think it makes more sense, personally, to operationalize the entire archipelago as being in the same continent, rather than arbitrarily dividing it. Hence another reason I am sympathetic to "Indonesia is in Oceania".
Like I said though, there's genuine reasons to include Indonesia in Asia. Cultural reasons is a big one. The Malay Archipelago just historically interacted a lot more with mainland Asia in human history than it did with the rest of Oceania. You just heard me talk about Sanskrit influencing the language of the area, for example. Even in modern times, Indonesia is part of the ASEAN, which has "Southeast Asia" in its name, and it very clearly sees itself as the maritime extension of the subcontinient. My GF also sees the history of mainland SE Asia as part of her history, and talks to me about it extensively. Meanwhile, despite being in the same language family, the other Austronesian cultures of Oceania just... don't come up.
Once again, if people think Jakarta is an Asian city, not an Oceanian city, I would not fight them on that. My main reason for putting them in Oceania is what I said in the article; I just think Oceania needed the help in representation because it'd just be a list of Australian cities otherwise. Oceania is by far the most misunderstood of the seven main continents (the fact that for a while, English would insist on calling it "Australia" when its much more than that is annoying); Perhaps I'm going too far in the other direction, but at least I'm bringing people's attention that it exists.