Talk:Johns Creek, Georgia

Latest comment: 5 years ago by Magnolia677 in topic Government section

Article needs citations

edit

Only two citations and possibly incorrect information in paragraph one of history (Mazeppa).

Kobitate94 (talk) 00:29, 15 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 18 external links on Johns Creek, Georgia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:14, 26 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Johns Creek, Georgia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:33, 29 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

Government section

edit

This is the second time I've re-added detailed information about the city's government - city councilmembers, privatization history, etc. None of the style guides referenced by others when removing this material actually discourages its inclusion, and the information is cited multiple times via reputable sources. brad. (talk) 00:41, 8 November 2019 (UTC)Reply

Large parts of the addition are unsourced, and the addition--13,366 bytes--accounts for over 30 percent of the article. I have attempted to trim the edit, using WP:WEIGHT, WP:INDISCRIMINATE, and WP:USCITIES as reasons in my edit summary, though my edits have been reverted. The input of other editors would be appreciated. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:19, 8 November 2019 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for the comment. I'm aware it's a large section of the article and the information might be better-suited to a new, separate page (Mayor of Johns Creek? Johns Creek City Council? Government of Johns Creek?) but I personally still believe it to be useful information. WP:WEIGHT discusses minority and fringe viewpoints, which doesn't apply here. WP:INDISCRIMINATE seems to be focused on whether a subject deserves an article of its own, not whether it should be included in a list as here. WP:USCITIES is merely a template and guideline. I strongly disagree with the idea that because the information is a large percentage of the article it is bloated and unneeded. I also now understand that the losing candidates are likely not notable; feel free to remove those mentions (I will try to get to it soon). Also, the information in the City Council section is all sourced in the following subsection, Previous elected officials - I will go back and add inline citations where necessary. brad. (talk) 01:31, 9 November 2019 (UTC)Reply
@DividedFrame: You wrote: "I also now understand that the losing candidates are likely not notable; feel free to remove those mentions". I have already removed them more than once and you added them back. I'm trying to avoid an edit war, and I'm not certain what exact parts of your edit you are willing to remove, so I'll ask you instead to remove those particular sections. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:21, 9 November 2019 (UTC)Reply
@Magnolia677: Thank you and I will. I reinstated the entire section that was removed which is why that information was added back. Again I appreciate you taking the time to discuss this :) brad. (talk) 20:36, 9 November 2019 (UTC)Reply
@DividedFrame: Thank you for removing part of your edit. I still believe this section is excessively long for the article. Would you be willing to remove any more? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 01:19, 10 November 2019 (UTC)Reply
I've condensed it further now. brad. (talk) 08:55, 10 November 2019 (UTC)Reply
@DividedFrame: In addition, I have removed the unsourced content you added to that section. Unfortunately, the government section remains filled with unencyclopedic details about non-notable former elected officials. Per WP:INDISCRIMINATE and WP:USCITIES, would you consider trimming this section? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:43, 12 November 2019 (UTC)Reply