Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities/Archive 12

Archive 5

←

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Request for Comment: what is a city proper

There is a new RFC at Talk:List of cities proper by population#Guiding principles for List of cities proper by population about how to define what a city proper is. While it may seem straightforward for some countries such as the U.S., this question is not so easy to answer for other countries, e.g. China. Any comments would help make our city lists more internally consistent. Thanks. --Polaron | Talk 19:11, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Small correction. This RFC does not ask for a new definition of city proper. There are various. It asks which definition to use consistently for the purpose of List of cities proper by population. -- BsBsBs (talk) 05:13, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Jamestown and Santa Fe are missing.

I am the 10th great grandson of Sir George Yeardley who was was on the second fleet of supply ships into the Jamestown Virginia area in 1609 and Governor of Virginia in 1618 and 1626 (attributed with forming the very first representative form of government in America. I now live in Santa Fe, New Mexico. Both Jamestown, Virginia and Santa Fe, New Mexico were founded in 1607-1610 depending upon accounts...years before the Mayflower. Santa Fe's history actually goes back to the 1500s. They (Jamestown and Santa Fe) have both been continuously inhabited since that time but are missing from this article. Please add them to the New World list as they actually are the second/third oldest town in the U.S.

71.213.154.16 (talk) 20:44, 12 August 2010 (UTC) Ken Dutton (Yeardley) Santa Fe, New Mexico

Featured Picture of Melbourne needing home

File:Yarra Night Panorama, Melbourne - Feb 2005.jpg. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 23:02, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Turpan/Turfan

There is a naming disagreement at Talk:Turfan#Naming. If anyone is interested in offering suggestions you are free to comment. rʨanaɢ (talk) 19:30, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Bratislava FAR initiated

I have nominated Bratislava for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Daniel Case (talk) 03:41, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Town Common

There are other Town Commons in Rhode Island. There is one located in North Smithfield and Bristol. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.110.206.64 (talk) 00:32, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

FAR notice Ahmedabad

I have nominated Ahmedabad for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. -- Cirt (talk) 04:53, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject San Diego

I have formed a new WikiProject to organize San Diego. If anybody interested, please add your name on the participants. If have have questions about it, please feel free to add comments. JJ98 (Talk) 21:43, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Jerusalem

There is currently a discussion taking place at Talk:Jerusalem over how the article should word certain issues. Some editors want the word "proclaimed" to be added to the first sentence of the article to describe it as the "proclaimed capital" of Israel as the international community does not recognise it as the capital of Israel, others disagree and think the status quo which has existed for about 3 years should remain (something that has been debated many times over the years but retained), and several compromises have also been suggested. The issue has now also spread to other matters, with some editors wanting it to say "proclaimed flag", "proclaimed mayor" , "proclaimed coat of arms" etc, to also highlight the fact the international community does not recognise the status of Jerusalem. This matter could have implications for other articles if changes are made and a similar pattern followed. So input from other editors would be helpful. Thanks BritishWatcher (talk) 14:11, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Notable People sections

I've requested feedback on some changes to the Notable people section guide on the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities/US Guideline#Notable people sections. ThanksDkriegls (talk) 21:40, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

oldest European city

Reggia calabria and Cumais cannot be the the first European cities. The world didn't start and stop with the Greeks. The Etruscans, Ligurians and the Canaanites(Phoenicians) had established cities well before them. What about Spain and Portugal? Couldn't they have had a "European" city earlier than this? I recently read an article on Wikipedia that claimed the Chaldeans with others founded the first European city, albeit at the current location of Reggia Calabria. When I clicked on this no mention was made of this Chaldean voyage. It was all about the Greeks. Sheesh! Magnificat71 (talk) 21:03, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

How do you judge "oldest European city"? Many "cities" have been settlements long before any formal recognition as a "city". How do you define "city" - some European states have formal definitions, whereas others do not. Folks at 137 (talk) 14:01, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Reference requested: New Market, IA

I'd like to see a reference for the following sentence in the article on New Market, Iowa, but I can't find the original author's name.

According to a 2005 US News & World Report article, New Market is a de facto as well as a de jure "sundown town" meaning that African-Americans are banned from living within New Market city limits by local ordinance.

Alternium (talk) 04:39, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

This seems frivolous and WP:COATRACK in view of the 2.5% blacks in the entire state, and those, mostly in cities. There were never any blacks in Iowa to start with. None migrated to rural areas in the Great Migration from the south to the north. The "de jure" could because of an (unsubstantiated) antique rule, that is doubtless invalid at this late stage and unenforceable. Irrelevant. I have deleted it. Thanks for bringing it to our attention. BTW, there are lots of "de jure" laws against selling homes to Jewish people still supposedly in force. These can't be enforced since the Supreme Court declared them (title restrictions) illegal in the 1960s. Same sort of thing IMO. Student7 (talk) 00:37, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Proposed rename of Plymouth

There is a current proposal at Talk:Plymouth to rename the article and replace the page with a disambiguation page. The proposal has already been flagged for attention by the automobile wikiproject and as a result a number of comments proposing the car is just as important as the city and keeping the article represents a UK bias. Consequently raising for attention here to give appropriate balance. Comments either way are welcome. Fæ (talk) 06:44, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Move/content issue: List of named ethnic enclaves in North American cities

Please see Talk:List_of_named_ethnic_enclaves_in_North_American_cities#Name_-_move.3F.Skookum1 (talk) 17:44, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Proposal to make "New York" a disambiguation page

Although it doesn't directly involve New York City, it will be affected by the results (or lack of results) at this discussion: Talk:New York#Requested move. (See also the lengthy earlier discussions at Talk:New York (state)/Archive 3.) At present, New York refers to the state of New York, with a hatnote referring readers to (1) New York City and (2) New York (disambiguation). The proposal would retitle the disambiguation page as New York, and the state's article as New York (U.S. state), following the model of Washington. —— Shakescene (talk) 21:14, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Bronx/The Bronx

This project has its banner on this article, so I wanted to point out that a discussion is ongoing about opening an RfC to determine whether the article should be at Bronx or The Bronx. [1] Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:37, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

The RfC has now been opened at Talk:Bronx#Request for Comments on renaming "(The) Bronx" (September 2010). —— Shakescene (talk) 18:04, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

The Request for Comments has now been closed and Bronx moved back to The Bronx. This shouldn't affect most of your existing links, although you might want to check some highly specialized ones (such as the conditionals I fixed at Template:NYC boroughs). —— Shakescene (talk) 17:03, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Include the name of towns' or cities' inhabitants

I am a newcomer, so please excuse me if I miss the point. I think it would be interesting to add an item in all web pages about cities, towns (or even greater areas, as counties, regions or countries) stating how their inhabitants are called (gentile names and adjectives). In many cases it might be obvious, but there are many others which do not follow the expected rules. Thanks.Rafel-go (talk) 14:58, 16 September 2010 (UTC).

I don't quite understand the question. Are you asking us to say that people from Milan are called "Milanese," maybe? Or "Italians?" Or do you mean that some of the inhabitants are Arabic or Gypsies? Student7 (talk) 23:41, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

I think the question is about demonyms such as Parisian, Londoner, New Yorker, Bostonian, Berliner, Muscovite [Los] Angeleno, Liverpudlian, Mancunian, Glaswegian, Scouse, Cairene, Madrileño, Carioca or Porteño. If you look at Template:Infobox settlement, there are in fact two lines near the bottom to give just that information.

What I think is needed is more encouragement for those working on such articles to fill the "demonym" line. (A good start might be to replace a handy but obscure linguistic term of art like "demonym", which many editors may not understand. And looking up demonym, I learn the specialised word "gentilic", apparently a synonym of "demonym".)—— Shakescene (talk) 01:37, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Demonym should be kept. I don't think people would understand the word "gentilic" any more than demonym. Best, epicAdam^(talk) 13:38, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

I agree that demonym is preferable to gentilic (at least it can't be confused with half a dozen other meanings.) But it's still obscure jargon. The problem is how to express that idea in a very few words. ("What the inhabitants are called"; "name of the inhabitants"). —— Shakescene (talk) 16:05, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Five weeks later, I still think "demonym" is specialized jargon that doesn't help the ordinary average reader glancing at the Info Box for a quick overview (I had to figure out for myself what it meant). We don't put in postal, telephonic and time zone details mainly to help specialists or scholars; they're there principally for ordinary people (including tourists and business people) visiting or communicating with the city, who might also reasonably want to know what to call an inhabitant of Toulouse or Rio de Janeiro. —— Shakescene (talk) 17:00, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Disambiguation

Concurrent with the batch of suggested page moves for English citie at talk:Peterborough, Talk:Dover, Talk:Plymouth, Talk:Sydenham, Talk:Cornwall & Talk:Cambridge, editors are also invited to leave their comments at Talk:Malvern, Worcestershire#Suggested page move. --Kudpung (talk) 16:41, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

¶ There are a host of simultaneous discussions on these related topics, scattered over all sorts of different places (WikiProjects, Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names), individual cities', states' and regions' article talk pages, etc., etc.) Currently, the biggest and broadest seems to be taking place at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Why are British places generally not _disambiguated —— Shakescene (talk) 17:18, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Book:City of Sheffield

Feedback would be appreciated. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 07:48, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Cities articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the WikiProject Cities articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Sunday, November 14th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of November, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

If you have already provided feedback, we deeply appreciate it. For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 16:38, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

List of capitals of multiple countries or territories simultaneously

Hi all,
I think there may be some problems with List of capitals of multiple countries or territories simultaneously. It's not the usual edit-warring or POV-pushing, but a slightly more existential problem, in that I think the list is a bit meaningless. However, all contrary opinions are welcome; please drop in at the talkpage if you have any suggestions for how to improve the article.
bobrayner (talk) 04:04, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Mention of Aleppo pogrom in History section of Aleppo

I would have thought that the following paragraph:

In December 1947, after the UN vote in favour of the partition of Palestine, an Arab mob attacked and devastated the Jewish quarter. The ancient Great Synagogue was completely gutted by fire. The overall damage to the community was estimated at $2.5 million. Soon after, many of the towns 6,000 Jews emigrated.

would have been acceptable to add the the history section of Aleppo. A certain editor keeps removing it, claiming that the incident is covered in the demographics section. While the page does have its own Jews in Allepo section, I don't see why this occurance needs to be whitewashed in the history section. Also, should the demographics section hold historic infomation? Chesdovi (talk) 21:29, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

US Census 2010 & nearby cities

What plans exist for updating entries on US places dependent on US census data when Census 2010 data becomes available? Is someone working on a bot for that? Also, when that is done, it would be good to put in better information on nearby cities. In rural areas, that boiler-plate sentence in entries for towns, "The Town of X is in the Y part of the county and is southwest of Z." just isn't very useful. I have ideas about how this could be done better.

Does anyone have plans to make a bot that deals with issues like these? --Pleasantville (talk) 20:03, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. cities

Please consider participating in the Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. cities discussion. Thanks. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 05:34, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

US Census 2010 Data Release Dates

The release dates for the Census 2010 data has been announced and can be found here. It is annoying to say the least. We could be here for a long time waiting on some information. Like 2013. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 09:46, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Looks like the release of some information is coming out a tick early. According to CNN, "The U.S. Census Bureau will unveil the results of 2010 Census on Tuesday." More than likely this will be population figures for redistricting for political districts, but it will still help us. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 03:11, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Alleyway

The usage of alleyway is under discussion, see Talk:Alleyway#Requested_move -- 65.95.14.34 (talk) 08:39, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Ann Arbor

Please see a debate on the name of Ann Arbor aka Ann Arbor, Michigan at Talk:Ann_Arbor#Revert_move. Fences&Windows 01:47, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

New assessment template icon

Please see my proposal at Template_talk:WikiProject_Cities#New_icon. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 00:31, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

What about notable duos/trios/small bands, shouldn't these be under the notable residents section if they apply?

Here's the situation: many small bands are composed of 3 or 4 people from the same town. If the band reaches the level of notability, we typically do not start an article for each person, unless either (a) the band goes far beyond notability and is very well recognized, or (b) band members have separate projects for which they are noted.

In the case that (a) and (b) do not apply, but the band is still notable, it sounds like it would still make sense to put the individuals under the "notable persons" section for a small town, with a listing like this:

• Band members Isaac Hanson, Taylor Hanson, and Zac Hanson, of the pop band Hanson, all reside in Tulsa, Oklahoma.

...even if there are not separate articles for each person.

Note that this does not apply to really large bands or ones with shifting members, i.e.

• Band members John A., Lisa B., Jimmy C., Taylor D., Terry E., Carlos F., Amy G.,... of the Penn State Marching Band, all reside in State College, Pennsylvania.

(Yes, I know that separate rules for colleges are in place as well, just an example.)

So anyway, is this something that needs to be up for a vote? I have an editor trying to delete my notable person entry for the members of a band that easily meets notability criteria, merely because the article is for the band, not the individuals. It seems to me that one of the biggest parts of the narrative for a small town is local kids make it big. In this case, it's certainly true, but I'd like to get all your thoughts on it here. This person is a stickler for the rules, but this is certainly a gray area. If we agree that it make sense to put small bands in the notable persons section, I'm certain that this editor would bow to the wishes of the group and stop deleting my altogether appropriate entry. 71.74.87.123 (talk) 04:11, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Or should it be three separate entries for Zac, Isaac and Taylor? The individuals (not the Hansons IRL, but a smaller band) are notable but only as members of the band. Sometimes a person's article is just a redirect to the band. Three separate entries, one band entry, or none at all? I bow to the wishes of the majority, once a decision is made. 71.74.87.123 (talk) 04:43, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

First, be careful how you state things. You make it sound like the "other editor" is just misguided or some kind of zealot. That "other editor" has mountains of experience editing similar articles and is very familiar with Wikipedia policies and guidelines regarding notability and such notable people lists. Consensus is a big part of Wikipedia, but local consensus does not override previously established consensus (or policy) over a broader topic (i.e. the inclusion of non-notable band members from a notable band). This topic would probably be better suited for discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities. Also, the point of city articles is to help readers have a general, yet thorough, understanding of a particular city/town/village. "Local kids making it big" is a very small part of a city's narrative, even for a small town. That town's history, government, geography, etc. are a much bigger part of that narrative. Finally, "making it big" is a matter of point of view. New Hollow has had some great accomplishments and is certainly poised for success; however, their notability is relatively low, recent, and thus has potential to be temporary.

I used this on my talk page as an example and I'll use it here: the band Six Parts Seven is listed at List of people from Kent, Ohio as the band, not as the individual. The band is what has notability (very little in this case), so mentioning that the band formed in and/or is based in a particular town seems appropriate for a notable people list. The individual names, however, usually don't have much notability, if any. Listing their names, especially if they all redirect to the band article, doesn't help the reader learn anything about that person. Notability must also be established individually, which of course could potentially happen later on. Notable people lists are more to connect relevant Wikipedia articles, not to serve as points of boosterism. --JonRidinger (talk) 19:12, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

I moved this from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities/US Guideline --JonRidinger (talk) 19:17, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Seeing a lot of easy fixes that could be made to formatting

Particularly US town articles seem to have suffered from viral-like replications of unfortunate glitches. One is the overlinking of common items such as "City", in the infobox and the main body. It is not usual to link commonly known country articles, such as "United States". Items such as "immigrants", "tourism", etc, should not normally be linked unless readers are even slightly likely to need to divert to those targets. Hyphens should not be used instead of minus signs in geographical coordinates and temperatures. Please let me know if there are any queries about these matters. Thanks. Tony (talk) 07:21, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Aid for census maintenance

I've made a suggestion that might aid census maintenance at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Use_bots_to_maintain_census_figures. Your comments are welcome. Student7 (talk) 13:13, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Mumbai Images

There is an ongoing discussion on proposed image changes at Talk:Mumbai. Around The Globe^{सत्यमेव जयते} 06:59, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Sister cities of Ōtsuchi, Iwate and Fort Bragg, California

I have used the following template (see below right) on the Fort Bragg, California article, but it doesn't look quite right, I could use some help with this. I can't find sister city "categories", only sister city "lists", two of them, which appear to be doubles!! except one list may refer strictly to the official USA network of twin cities? If this the case, would it not be much more useful to have categories so that everything is automated?--Tallard (talk) 20:49, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Notables

I'd rather talk about this in an MOS section but would be forced out of any discusssion I tried!

Notables in cities preclude the mayor, councilmen, etc. from being notable in that same list. i.e. they have to be notable outside the city. This works for athletes and beauty contestants as well. So Miss Chicago is nn in Chicago's article. She is in a neighborhood article. An athlete representing the city every year, the same. They have to win to be notable.

What gets me, is that this is so clear for these folks, but clouds up quickly when you talk about musical groups, entertainers, and what have you. Are the City Screamers really more notable than the mayor? Somehow, it doesn't seem likely, but harder to create a bar that someone must pass, as was done for the earlier groups. Student7 (talk) 17:39, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

This is the inevitable result of using "Notable Fooians" or the equivalent and trying to require that individuals in the list or section must already have an article or be "worthy" of an article. It would be better to call the section "Foo people" and say something like "Notable residents of Foo and other people important in the development, life, and culture of Foo" with guidance that a reference should be provided demonstrating either the residency or importance. For many small towns, that means the only major league sports star born in the town is on the list, but so is the original landowner who platted the village in the 19th century (but never did anything else), the railroad commissioner who got the railroad to stop there, the mad hermit for whom the town was named (Mr. Foo), and the mayors, school founders, and builders who are well known to the old-timers of Foo, even if they are known to nobody else. Some of these people might fit best into a good section or article on the history of Foo, but they can live on in the list until somebody comes along and writes the improved section.--Hjal (talk) 18:08, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Tables or graphs?

Hi. I do some work for WP:OREGON and recently, because the Census results started to come out, I began replacing {{USCensusPop}} in some Oregon city articles with a self-made line graph of the same data. With some help, I was able to copy the previous tables onto the graphs' description pages, with the citations as well, if they were there. But a few days ago this came up, originally as a compliment for this graph I made, but an editor pointed out that there was no consensus about using the graphs instead of the tables. Any thoughts about which is better to have in city articles? Thanks. --Jsayre64 (talk) 13:15, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

This is nice work and interesting. I would have to agree that the line graph not be used because it's accuracy is dependent on one person: you! I think we need material presented in the old way (UScensuspop template?), I think, that has all the material in there that subsequent editors can check. This can be done only in the grossest sense, with a line graph.

It is probably possible with monumental work to transform numbers in a template to a graph. Then that argument partly goes away since editors can check it (but not the average reader).

Secondly, if you go back far enough, most urban places look like they are growing out of sight (asymptotic). Which may be true! But somehow looks like a biased C-of-C presentation.

I am doubtful. Student7 (talk) 15:48, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

I wouldn't say that the accuracy depends on me. As I said, to make each graph, I use the data from the table {{USCensusPop}} in the city's article, punch in the numbers, and the application makes the graph for me, with an option to export in PNG format. To verify the data, editors can go to a graph's description page and find the original table/template there. So the data's reliability doesn't change when I make the graphs. Jsayre64 (talk) 18:21, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

I guess my point was that I can verify each item to the person in the UScensuspop template. If the city is 1,000,371, it is in the table exactly. If I want to verify yours, I can look at an intercept and guess "around 1,000,000." Maybe close enough for some places, but it lacks credibility IMO and thoroughly dependent on you. I would rather, for the long term, not be dependent on a single editor for data. Someday, you might find better things to do!  :) Student7 (talk) 17:42, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Nice as the graph truly looks, I'm in agreement with Student7 here. It's good when other editors are able to update the data in the future, which is not the case here. -- DanielKlotz (talk · contribs) 03:15, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Can someone help

There is a contributor (user:Kingjeff) to the article Cologne, who is making substantial changes without being tremedously familiar with the city. See mine and his talk page for details. I tried to explain it to him, but can't deal with this. --ZH2010 (talk) 03:51, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

I went to college at SUNY Cortland and question the claim that Cortland is the closest incorporated city to the geographic center of New York state. The geographic center of the state is recognized to be in the hamlet of Pratts Hollow, very close to my hometown of Munnsville. I believe that the incorporated city of Oneida is closer to Pratts Hollow, as may be Norwich, Rome, or even Utica. Pabab47 (talk) 22:23, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Reliability of source

You are invited to join the discussion at WP:RSN#sandiegostreetcars.org. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:36, 28 April 2011 (UTC) (Using {{pls}})

There is an income disparigy, not segregation.

Niagara Falls, NY is not segregated. Please take down that racist crap. My block in Niagara Falls has families of all colors and there are no problems. The other day at my daughter's doctor's office, every child was mixed. Take down the post of the idiots flying a confederate flag, they probably posted it themselves. Niagara Falls is a nice community, don't let the racists that posted this crap change how you think about Niagara Falls. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crystalbess (talk • contribs) 17:01, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Las Vegas is a disambiguation page...

...And not because of confusion with the small town in New Mexico. The argument that it should be is that since lots of Vegas references are about something on the Strip and the Las Vegas Strip is not inside city limits, these are actually references to the Las Vegas metropolitan area and not the city. The argument that it shouldn't be a disambig is that the Strip is part of the city no matter what the government tells us and all those references really are about the city, not the metro area. A good discussion with elements of what belongs in a city article and what belongs in a metro area article.

Comment at Talk:Las Vegas#Requested move 2. The discussion seems to be going nowhere and could use a bunch of smart people to help out. Oddly enough, the discussion so far has only had three commenters, two of which seem entirely incapable of agreeing on anything, and a third that hasn't voiced a clear opinion. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 14:58, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Portal:Shanghai

FYI, someone created Portal:Shanghai

65.95.13.213 (talk) 04:56, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Myrtle Beach is up for deletion

I have placed WikiProject Myrtle Beach for deletion at WP:MFD. Please comment here for any concerns. Thanks, JJ98 (Talk) 01:21, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Portal:Tbilisi

{{portal|Tbilisi}} Portal:Tbilisi has been nominated for deletion. 184.144.166.87 (talk) 06:45, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

San Diego is up for peer review

I have listed San Diego for peer review. Please comment here. Thank you. JJ98 (Talk / Contributions) 00:45, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Eastbourne is going through a GAR

Details here: Talk:Eastbourne/GA1. SilkTork *^{Tea time} 23:09, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#The Weather Channel

Since this affects US city articles using {{Weather box}} with The Weather Channel as a climate data source I thought I would leave a note here in case anyone was interested. Ks0stm ^(T•C•G) 02:08, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Municipality

Cleanup work has begun on Municipality. For a long time, this article had zero references and degenerated. In my opinion, most country-specific entries can go. Municipality is a generic term for an incorporated place of any size. Please help. Thank you. BsBsBs (talk) 05:44, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

City article - definition

The City article starts with "A city is a relatively large and permanent settlement." The section on the United States explains that almost any settlement can be called a city there, even those of very small size. My favourite is Soldier, Kansas, with a population of 122 and an area of 0.2 square miles. This American definition differs from both the starting definition and what the rest of the world does. How did it arise? HiLo48 (talk) 07:16, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

If I post a little bump here, will anybody notice? HiLo48 (talk) 23:50, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Oakland, California

I was hoping seasoned editors of city articles could browse the Oakland article and give feedback on changes which could bring it more in-line with GA status. As of now, we have a handful of very good editors, albeit with differing opinions on content, but could use outside perspective in relation to other articles on major cities.--Chimino (talk) 22:03, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Featured Article Review for History of Miami

This article is being reviewed for Featured Article de-nomination:

• History of Miami; talk page
• Wikipedia:Featured article review/History of Miami/archive1

Daniel Christensen (talk) 23:00, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Help needed at RfC on Las Vegas

Input would be appreciated at RfC on naming several Las Vegas -related articles, at RfC here. Thanks. --Noleander (talk) 14:56, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Places in Virginia

Many of the places listed at Template:Richmond County, Virginia have coordinates within the city of Richmond rather than Richmond County. The confusion seems to come from their listings in the Geographic Names Information System, which list the places as being in Richmond County but give their coordinates as being in the city of Richmond, 50 miles away. The GNIS seems to have taken all of the places in question from a 1988 Alexandria Drafting Company map of either Richmond or Richmond County, which I can't find. I asked the GNIS about it months ago, but they still haven't done anything about it (which is odd, since they usually address issues within a few weeks at the most). Some of the places are included on the city of Richmond's neighborhood map, which makes me think they're neighborhoods, but I can't find evidence of the others outside of the GNIS. Should we consider them to be neighborhoods based on the coordinates, and if so, are any of them actually notable, and what do we do about the rest? TheCatalyst31 ^{Reaction•Creation} 20:22, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Naming conventions for Townships in Pennsylvania

The text of the following notice was written by Gerry D on my talk page. I'm reproducing here in the interest of seeking broad participation in the discussion. older ≠ wiser 13:51, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Peer Review of New York City

This is to inform you that I have send a request for a peer review of New York City. Your response would be helpful. See:Wikipedia:Peer review/New York City/archive2

thanks, OpenInfoForAll (talk) 02:03, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

External link discussion

A discussion which may interest members of this WikiProject has been stated at WP:ELN#eastkilbride.co.uk regarding an external link currently in use on an article within scope of this WikiProject. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:32, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Ely, Cambridgeshire

I am working on improving the article Ely, Cambridgeshire, as set out on the talk page here. I had considered submitting it to WP:PR but on reading the submission guidelines, particularly "Peer review ... is intended for high-quality articles that have already undergone extensive work", I decided to submit the article for feedback first. I am just looking for community feedback on how to take this further. I have discussed this with the Worm That Turned (talk · contribs) on his page and on my page. He recommended I ask you for advice. How should I proceed? --Senra (Talk) 19:40, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Barcelona#A few changes

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Barcelona#A few changes. Elizium23 (talk) 00:32, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Viipuri/Vyborg naming RfC

For editors who are interested, there is an RfC over at Talk:Continuation War about which name we should use for the town of Vyborg/Viipuri during World War II. This will affect quite a few articles on the Finnish/Soviet conflict, and depending on what is decided there, could also have ramifications for Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names). If you could comment, it would be very much appreciated. The RfC thread can be found here. Regards — Mr. Stradivarius ^♫ 14:49, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

The case of Alma

The town of Alma of the Galilee currently exists as two so called different "Almas" - the articles for Alma, Israel and Alma, Palestine, which describe 2 periods of the same location and place name.

• The town has an ancient history, which is already the same for both articles.
• The location of both is practically the same - 500 meter difference between Arab town center of early 20th century and later Israeli town center (ancient artifacts of "Alma" of previous eras are described within both articles).
• Uninhabited periods - Alma was abandoned in 17th century, with the Arab town established in 19th century within Ottoman Syria (later part of Mandate Palestine), lasting till 1948, Jewish Alma within Israel established in 1950s. So the transition was very fast, compated with previous "Almas".
• Even the prenounsation is the same in both Arabic and Hebrew.

So, is "Alma, Galilee" a good common ground to merge both "Alma"s and create a better article, or the politics will keep holding the same town in two alternative realities? Please discuss here.Greyshark09 (talk) 23:16, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Asking for help

On the Wikipedia page Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Croatia#Information it takes a while exhausting debate on the writing and writing at all of minority languages in articles about settlements in Croatia. Please if you have time, look at the page and try to help us in forming some kind of agreement. We will highly appreciate your effort.--MirkoS18 (talk) 22:55, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Please do help @ Baguio_(disambiguation)

hopiakuta Please do sign your communiqué .~~Thank You, DonFphrnqTaub Persina. 16:30, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Purpose of needs-photo ?

What task does the parameter needs-photo=yes address? It is actually of use to anyone? Yes it says the article needs a photograph, but that is what {{Image requested}} does. As most requests in the sub-categories under Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in places are requesting images of settlements will Category:WikiProject Cities articles needing photographs be allowed to expand to contain 10,000s of duplicate requests? --Traveler100 (talk) 20:52, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

So no objection if I delete the parameter and the category? --Traveler100 (talk) 20:42, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Seems fine to me, unless I'm missing something. :) Killiondude (talk) 20:46, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

So I have gone though the list and removed requests where pictures have been added and added a few pictures where I have found something that fits. That has removed over 100. I have now started looking at replacing the needs-photo in WPCities with Image Requested of the appropriate location eg. [2] [3] but this is going to take some time with about 900 articles. --Traveler100 (talk) 08:49, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

RFC on coordinates in highway articles

There is currently a discussion taking place at WT:HWY regarding the potential use of coordinates in highway articles. Your input is welcomed. --Rschen7754 01:40, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Townships, census designated places and unincorporated communities

Does this Wikiproject cover articles about townships, census designated places and unincorporated communities? More specifically, when writing an article about such a community, should Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/US Guideline still be followed? Matthewedwards :  Chat  20:32, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

It covers all three of those both per the project scope and in practice. From my experience, Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/US Guideline is generally followed for articles like this, but in a limited fashion since not all sections will apply to smaller communities or townships. Unincorporated communities in particular also tend to have more sections specific to the community; for example, if a community is primarily known for a local landmark, that landmark will often get its own section. TheCatalyst31 ^{Reaction•Creation} 21:18, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

I would second what TheCatalyst31 said. Generally, the USCities guideline is a good one to follow, though not in exactness for sure. Obviously there will be many sections that are in the guideline and other city articles that will either be smaller, combined with other sections, or not used at all. --JonRidinger (talk) 21:50, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Question: Population size?

Hi everyone, is the a limit on how small a city, town, or village (CTV)can be to have its own article or are all named locations (CTVs) counted on a government census considered notable to have an article? -AMAPO (talk) 20:12, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

As far as I know if there is documentation of a place via the census (some data that an article can be written from), it should be OK for an article. I am not aware of any population minimums. In some very small cases where very little data is available, that place could also be included in whatever the next largest area is (county, township, etc.) instead of a stand-alone article. --JonRidinger (talk) 21:31, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

FAR of Mysore

I have nominated Mysore for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.-Ravi_{My Tea Kadai} 02:28, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

flagcons in settlement infoboxes

At present there is a discussion ongoing about putting flagcons in settlement info boxes. See: Template_talk:Infobox_settlement#flagcons_in_settlement_infoboxes --S. Rich (talk) 15:23, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

I live in Millbury, MA and don't appreciate the comment on how much money you make! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.237.169.164 (talk) 01:49, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Merge input needed - Hopkinton, MA

Should Hopkinton (CDP), Massachusetts merged with Hopkinton, Massachusetts? Please comment at Talk:Hopkinton, Massachusetts. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 04:03, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Notable people section edit warning note.

I clean up a lot of notable people sections and have found several different edit notes used. I was thinking maybe we should standardize the note. I use the note developed by the WikiProject Oregon seen here. I removed two phrases from their note. The first was the limit to Biography pages. Notability alone should suffice. I have encountered the rare individual who meets notability but doesn't warrant their own biography and is covered by a non-biography Wikipedia article. The other phrase I removed was "without further explanation". I felt this violated WP:Civility and plus, all edits should come with an explanation. Below is what I post. What do people think? Should all Notable people sections get this note? Dkriegls (talk) 04:08, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

<!-- Note:
· Only people who already have a Wikipedia article may appear here. This establishes notability.
· The article must mention how they are associated with <city name>, whether born, raised, or residing.
· The fact of their association should have a reliable source cited.
· Alphabetical by last name please.
· All others will be deleted.
-->

It strikes me as too generous for places above towns (which I mostly edit). The person is notable at the lowest level of place (except for huge cities like NYC, etc. Different rules apply). So for Oregon, the person must be notable outside Oregon. Else we have a list of all governors, all legislators (!), all judges (whether Supreme or not), all Miss Oregons (BTW, I have been brought before an admin for "dispute resolution" for editing out people who were in the dozens, if not hundreds. And the admin hearing the "case" has been on Wikipedia for a short while himself! So I could lose!

I've a rule of thumb for military generals - BGEN okay at local level, MGEN okay at county level, LTGEN at state level (except maybe the larger states). Anyway...Student7 (talk) 22:31, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

There are various notes being used in city articles. Illinois has one, Iowa has another, Kansas has another. To discuss something of this scope, I feel that we should dedicate a new discusion page just to talk about that one subject. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 23:53, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Sbmeirow, if we are serious about setting a standard, or at least a standard recommendation, then this would be the place to discuss it. An invitation to discuss this matter could be placed at the talk pages of project pages for each US state. Dkriegls (talk) 07:55, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Student7, I'm not clear on what you are getting at. If they have a biography page, and have a citation connecting them to the city/town/village as having been born, raised, or residing there, they should be included. If you are having an admin dispute about this, link to it on my talk page and I will get involved. Dkriegls (talk) 07:57, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Dkriegls, thanks for offering your assistance. I jumped to conclusions and the matter was resolved.

The problem which is solved easily at the local level (which you have been doing. Note that for cities, this would include "neighborhoods", but NOT necessarily the city itself), by including everybody with an article, is not so easily solved at a higher level article. People keep "accumulating" to the point where WP:NOTDIR comes into play. Hundreds or thousands of people. So the person must be important beyond the limits of the article scope - that is, noteworthy beyond place X. This is pretty much true of the entire article, BTW, and not really anything new. If I say something about (say) Iowa, it should be of interest to someone outside Iowa, or why bother inserting it. It should be "new", at least to somebody. For example not all states have "Supreme Courts" at the top of their judicial system. New York has it at the bottom!!!

Quantity defeats these articles. I cannot monitor a list of a thousand (or more - think about New York!) people. So mayors are automatically eliminated from a city list unless they are notable outside the city. Like Jimmy Walker and Fiorello Laguardia would probably be included for NYC. But not all mayors may have been similarly notable.

Basically, we are trying to establish guidelines so that the Category "People from.." isn't identical to the "List of people from..." Otherwise, why bother having a "List of people from.."? Student7 (talk) 13:42, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

I follow you. I think huge geographies like states and countries should be left to categories. No need to make a list page. However, I think the big cites are manageable. I do quite well managing the List of people from Chicago. New names come in at a reasonable pace so that I can check them and delete them if necessary. The initial clean up took forever though, and I still haven't cleaned up all of the prose, like I do with shorter lists. But I am slowly working on it. As for Mayors, that should probably be a separate list for NY City. Much like states have a list page for Governors. Dkriegls (talk to me!) 20:08, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

I concede that leaders of places can be treated separately. For several smaller cities, I have a great list that is then "hidden" for anyone who wishes to unhide it! Student7 (talk) 01:47, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

I like Sbmeirow's and Dkriegls' idea of discussing it here for all states.

Having said that, I gave up on editing a "big" city (smaller than Chicago!). Mostly athletes and musicians. About all I could do was look for blue links! Notable outside city? Quite possibly. But the ratio seemed preposterous and finally lost my interest for that. I can't imagine anyone's actually looking at it. (Just looked 150 x a day! Ouch! Can't imagine why? Looking for their name?  :)Student7 (talk) 00:31, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Istanbul up for peer review

The Istanbul article is up for a peer review at Wikipedia:Peer review/Istanbul/archive1 and I thought you all might be interested in providing some feedback. Feel free to do so when you get a chance. -- tariqabjotu 05:19, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

London infobox montage image

Hello all. If any of you are interested, there is currently a debate going on at the London talk page about whether to change the page's main infobox image montage. It would be useful to have a few more editors' opinions on this matter, so please drop by if you can. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 19:59, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

New Section - Additional tips for authors

I added a new section to Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/US Guideline. Please discuss if you don't like this section name, and suggest alternate better names. My desire is a section that provides tips that aren't specific to only ONE section, such as photos. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 05:26, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

The reason I created the photo tips subsection is to provide suggestions to help cleanup the layout mess on many city articles. Numerous articles need to be tweaked for better layout. Minor changes to the location of photos can easily fix this problem. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 05:26, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

I changed the intro to a please instead of a should, removed the word "ugly", and did some copy edit clean up. Otherwise, looks good to me. Just good advice. Dkriegls (talk) 18:28, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Taos, New Mexico

This article has many problems, lack of supporting references, tone of the article, lots of original research, and needs a ton of cleanup (among other things). Could a few members of WP:CITIES take a look, please? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 21:01, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Talk a look at Wikipedia:ANI#Wikhounding_and_inappropriate_article_tagging_by_User:Neutralhomer while you are at it. The article is nowhere near needing "a ton of cleanup". This is at least partially harassment, pure and simple. Yworo (talk) 21:39, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Report on the use of self-published sources

The first version of a report on the use of self-published sources is now available, in Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia reliability. Some of the self-published sources listed in the report pertain to this project.

Suggestions on the report itself (a discussion has started here), and help in remedying the use of the self-published items that relate to this project will be appreciated. History2007 (talk) 06:17, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Peer-review for "List of people from.."

I'm trying to create some consensus on what a "List of people from..." page should look like. The List of people from Park Ridge, Illinois has had the most editor input and is the only such list of a US city which is fully cited. It was previously nominated for featured list, but the conclusion was to bring it to Wikipedia:Peer review instead.

The current peer review can be found here, and all are encouraged to say their piece, as a successful featured list is likely to be used as a standard reference for such lists. --Dkriegls (talk to me!) 23:30, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Demographics boilerplate for US cities

The third paragraph of the boilerplate used in the "Demographics" section for U.S. cities is decidedly sub-excellent. This seems like an appropriate venue to discuss it; could we try to reach consensus on a replacement?

Here's an example of the paragraph, taken from Bassett, Nebraska:

In the city the population was spread out with 17.8% under the age of 18, 5% from 18 to 24, 18.4% from 25 to 44, 28.9% from 45 to 64, and 29.7% who were 65 years of age or older. The median age was 51.9 years. The gender makeup of the city was 46.8% male and 53.2% female.

There are two problems with this. First, "the population was spread out" is misleading: at first glance, it looks as though it should be about population density. Second, it seems that the median age should come first, as a single number summarizing the age distribution; the details of the distribution should come after. I'd suggest a replacement like:

The median age in the city was 51.9 years. 17.8% of residents were under the age of 18; 5% were between the ages of 18 and 24; 18.4% were from 25 to 44; 28.9% were from 45 to 64; and 29.7% were 65 years of age or older. The gender makeup of the city was 46.8% male and 53.2% female.

Comments and suggestions on this would be appreciated. I've been in touch with another editor and get the impression that a change could be automated; but we'd want more than two people's opinions on the new wording before undertaking the effort. Ammodramus (talk) 15:42, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Agree. The phrase "spread out" was apparently from a template from the ancient days of Wikipedia (for the US 2000 census) where someone "just picked" a phrase, figuring that getting the data in the articles was really something and the precise wording could be "worked out later", perhaps. "distributed" seems like a better replacement. "Spread out" would be a good term for overweight America, I guess!  :) Student7 (talk) 22:45, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

I switched out the old paragraph for this proposed one in my program, so unless there are a bunch of future objections to this paragraph it will be getting used in several city updates to the 2010 census data. Of course if anybody sees a grammar or punctuation error with it let me know as soon as possible. Jamo2008 (talk) 12:59, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Kolkata

Please see WT:WikiProject Kolkata, where a discussion is underway on where to move/merge this inactive WikiProject to. -- 70.49.127.65 (talk) 02:14, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Istanbul at FAC

One of your WikiProject's top-importance articles, Istanbul, has recently been nominated for featured status. Feel free to participate in the discussion regarding its suitability at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Istanbul/archive1. -- tariqabjotu 21:50, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Facts of Civil rights movement in relate to Hampton Iowa.

Need to know facts of Civil rights movement in Hampton Iowa, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.161.100.98 (talk) 01:29, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you're inquiring about that here. This is the talk page for Wikiproject Cities, which is really more concerned with overall information on cities as a whole, not specific demographic information. While demographics are part of that, certainly, you may want to try posting on the talk page of the article (Talk:Hampton, Iowa). Although I am not sure how significant an effect the civil rights movement would have on a small farming town in a northern state with less than 5,000 people, which is also 90% white. WTF? (talk) 04:11, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Segregation statistics for U.S. metros

Hi all, recently some editors have been discussing some data points concerning segregation in urban america, specifically metropolitan areas. It has been suggested by a few that the proper context for this data would be either a separate article or on some metropolitan articles for all cities that have had statistical segregation present. I refer to:

• Brookings study and rankings
• Top 10 most segregated cities U.S. Census 2010
• Xcel doc going into more detail
• New York City, Boroughs and link to Chicago

Would like to see these current and important topics reflected encyclopedically at wiki. Thanks for all your thoughts on this. User:MarketdiamondMarketDiamond 22:06, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

I was hoping that some feedback or comments would be discussed here especially since on some articles talk pages I can sense this is a very important and even encyclopedic topic. I would propose we have a new article along the lines of Segregation (or perhaps Integration) in U.S. Metro Areas. Also that the Brookings top 20 or 25 metro areas have a few sentences on their metro area articles discussing both Brookings and other (hopefully local) studies. Please don't hesitate to add your opinion and views on this, and thank you. User:MarketdiamondMarketDiamond 20:33, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Adding the more recent: 2010 U.S. Census stats User:Marketdiamond MarketDiamond 01:22, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

"Plan a photo hunt in your city for Wikipedia Takes America in September."

Joining because I was wondering if this group was planning on participating. Missyagogo (talk) 03:53, 18 August 2012 (UTC)