Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities/Archive 17

Archive 10

←

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

US Cities

It's been 4 years since the 2010 Census. Why do so many articles on US cities still give data from the 2000 census with no updates to the more recent figures? Shouldn't there be a bot to update this stuff? john k (talk) 05:06, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Because it is the last actual count. Everything since then is just a statistical projection. This issue has been debated ad nauseum and the consensus has been an Encyclopedia should report actual counted numbers and not statistical estimates. --Dkriegls (talk to me!) 06:42, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Bar, Ukraine

appreciate help from WP Cities people. I've marked for clean up. article needs a lot of serious clean up also someone keeps adding an absolutely excessive photo gallery. LibStar (talk) 02:31, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi! Okay, cleaned up the photos (wow! somebody just cleaned out their photo albums). Worked on notable people. Will do some more work in the days to come. Onel5969 (talk) 04:18, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

thanks much appreciated. LibStar (talk) 04:33, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

RfC: Proposal to move Shizuoka back to disambiguated title

There is a Request for Comment regarding moving the article title for the city of Shizuoka back to a disambiguated title, following a recent move. Please join the discussion at Talk:Shizuoka#RfC: Proposed revert to disambiguated title. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:13, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

"Durham"

The usage of "Durham" is under discussion, see talk:Durham (disambiguation) -- 65.94.171.225 (talk) 06:58, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Tórshavn

I've added a B-class assessment for Tórshavn at the article's talk page, with suggestions for further work. — Sasuke Sarutobi (talk) 13:10, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

GAR

Paris, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Tim riley talk 14:38, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Suspect entry in infobox

Please see this question on the talk page for Albertów, Gmina Lubochnia, a village in Poland:

The infobox lists

settlement_type = Village que.

(including the period). What the heck is that? It sure doesn't look Polish, and there is no other page with that term (Search results).

If you want my participation in a discussion, please {{ping}} me.

--Thnidu (talk) 07:34, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Sister cities and infoboxes

Please head over to the Idea Lab to comment on a city related idea. Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab)#Twin towns. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 15:31, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

"Worcester"

The usage of Worcester is under discussion, see Talk:Worcester -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 04:21, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

The discussion on whether Worcester should become a disambiguation page has reopened. Please visit Talk:Worcester#Requested_move to add to the discussion.--Found5dollar (talk) 02:00, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

discussion that may be of interest

Talk:Newport Beach, California has an RfC that may be of interest. John from Idegon (talk) 02:37, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Notice of discussion at Talk:Charleston, South Carolina

A discussion has been started at Talk:Charleston, South Carolina#Armed Forces listing which appears to be within the scope of this WikiProject. Input from interested parties would be appreciated. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 04:49, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live!

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

External links

An editor has been systematically wiping out external links to official websites, for example, school districts (not individual schools), libraries, local historical societies, as well as links to historical maps and major online historical resources on cities. Should these be included in the External links section? Please weigh in here. --32.218.37.86 (talk) 04:39, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Per WP:NOT, Wikipedia is not a web directory. In this particular content dispute, you restored 10 links, which violates WP:NOT for a page of this size. A link to the paperweight museum could be made in the "Culture" section where it's already mention. Links to historical sites are usually fine, but I fail to see why we need links to 6 fire insurance maps that cover 1887 to 1913. Instead, a single link to all Neenah related documents and maps from that site could suffice. Here is the kind of compromise I'm talking about. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:51, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

You need to stop cherry-picking your examples. I would agree that a link to a paperweight museum is not appropriate, but neither is your "compromise". Why? Because it doesn't link to the historic maps whose links were removed. Your link to 1652 items does not lead to the 7 maps whose links were removed. It does lead to a lot of garf that has nothing to do with the city of Neenah (e.g., an essay on the Wisconsin Free Library Commission, the marriage record of a man named "John Neenah", etc.), leading to inevitable confusion and frustration on the part of the reader. The goal of the External links section is to lead the reader to useful further information on the topic of the article. Your link fails that test. I did find a way to access all the maps with one link. See what you think. 32.218.40.5 (talk) 16:01, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

I agree with a consolidated link is better than a general search link, though I'm not sure why fire maps in particular are more relevant than the many other historical documents available related to Neenah. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:11, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

For some reason, the fire insurance maps do not appear in the results shown in your link (go to your link, then filter on "Map or Atlas", and you'll see that). If you can find a way to show only historical documents relevant to Neenah (e.g., not marriage records for "John Neenah" who was married over 250 miles away from the city of Neenah) and that include the Sanborn maps, then do it. The value of the Sanborn maps is explained in their article. Of course, none of this negates the wholesale wiping out of other valuable links done by Asher Heimermann. That still needs to be dealt with. 32.218.40.5 (talk) 16:20, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Moving "Ségou" to "Segu" or "Segou"

Proposed move/renaming of article on a major Malian city - see Talk:Ségou.--A12n (talk) 20:45, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Political affiliation of holders of nonpartisan office

{{Infobox settlement}} includes the parameter leader_party, for displaying the political party for the mayor or other leader. Can or should this parameter be used when the office is nonpartisan? I have been unable to find any guidelines that address this question. Does anyone know of any prior discussions on the topic? Ibadibam (talk) 21:36, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Hyderabad

I have nominated Hyderabad 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. DrKiernan (talk) 12:12, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Berkhamsted

This article about a small/medium sized very historic UK market town (The Anglo-Saxons submitted to William the Conqueror there + Thomas a Becket, Chaucer, Richard the Holy Roman Emperor, the Black Prince etc all lived there) has been peer reviewed, and has been subject to a major upgrade with contributions by various good editors, as well as myself. I wonder if the ratings could be advanced from (Rated Start-class, Low-importance). Please also feel naturally free to suggest or make any improvements to the article. -- BOD -- 19:30, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Discussion of {{cite map}} template conversion

There is a discussion about the {{cite map}} template ongoing at Help talk:Citation Style 1/Archive 7#cite map. It is likely that the discussion will result in formatting changes (including some improvements and additional flexibility) to the template, which is used in about 18,000 articles. Your feedback, as frequent users of this template, will be welcome and needed if these changes are to be implemented with the least amount of negative side effects.

Please link to this discussion from Talk pages of other projects that use {{cite map}} frequently. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:04, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

X in city and by city categories emptied and blanked

See the discussion about Rathfelder (talk · contribs) at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2015_March_30#Category:Hospitals_by_city where it is indicated many "x in CITYNAME" and "x by city" categories have been blanked and/or emptied. -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 05:57, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Minority languages ​​in geographical Articles

Hi all! I just posted question on Minority language article talk page that you can see here: Talk:Minority language#Minority languages ​​in geographical Articles. I would be extremely grateful for your contribution through comments.--MirkoS18 (talk) 21:11, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

µSA

Is "µSA" really used as an abbreviation for Micropolitan Statistical Area, or did someone just make it up? Oiyarbepsy (talk) 05:17, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

This free dictionary thinks so--Dkriegls (talk to me!) 04:28, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Change of Quality Level of Solapur

I have improved the referencing standards of the Solapur city, can "somebuddy" please change its wikiproj level of quality from start to mid or upper level if any Ankush 89 (talk) 17:57, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Done --Dkriegls (talk to me!) 05:05, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Private schools and WP:SOAP

Please see this discussion on whether the Zurich International School (a private school) should be listed in the commune of Adliswil: Talk:Adliswil#Private_schools_and_Adliswil - The other believes that mentioning private schools in a city article is WP:SOAP while I argue that doing so is not WP:SOAP. The edit in question. WhisperToMe (talk) 14:12, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Discussion regarding notable people

There is a discussion that may be of interest to this project at Talk:Virginia Beach, Virginia#NPOV and Undue weight edits on notable people. Onel5969 (talk) 14:24, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Midlothian, TX wiki page

I just thought that this section "In 1883 the name ‘Midlothian’ was accepted by the local population. According to local legend, the area was named Midlothian when the Chicago, Texas, and Mexican Central railroads, which would eventually connect Dallas and Cleburne, arrived in the area and a homesick Scottish train engineer stated that the local countryside reminded him of his homeland in Scotland and the location served as the midpoint between Dallas and Cleburne, and between Ennis and Fort Worth. With the coming of the railroad, Midlothian grew and was incorporated in April 1888.[4]" might use a smoother transition so that the connection between the homesick Scotsman and the name Midlothian (perhaps of Scottish origin-colloquialism?) would be clearer?70.2.103.139 (talk) 04:53, 8 May 2015 (UTC)gs 05/07/2015

Since this proposal (I think?) isn't written clearly enough to tell what exactly you ate proposing, I doubt it. This discussion belongs on the article's talk page anyway. John from Idegon (talk) 06:08, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

John from Idegon is correct, it really should be taken to the article's talk page, and would help if the gist of what you are proposing/suggesting were more clear. Onel5969 (talk) 13:49, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Rakhshani listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Rakhshani to be moved to Rakhshani (village). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 23:20, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Sister cities listed in infoboxes?

Is it either a mandatory or an accepted practice to include "sister cities" within city infoboxes, using the optional parameter coding, e.g., [1]? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 17:22, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

I would say no. There have been discussions as to whether or not they should be included in the city articles in general, and something which is not that important shouldn't be in the infobox. Onel5969 (talk) 17:26, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Agreed. The honorary "sister cities" relationships are usually trivial, and often completely meaningless trivia. When I saw that the "optional" parameter was being tasked to accomplish this purpose, I suspected that inclusion of sister cities was by no means sanctioned by WP Cities -- otherwise it would already be a specific parameter. In addition to the edit linked above, you should be aware of this MOS discussion: Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons#Luhansk; it is a discussion that started today regarding the use of flag icons for sister cities in infoboxes and in the main article text. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 17:45, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Per MOS:INFOBOX, "[K]eep in mind the purpose of an infobox: to summarize key facts that appear in the article. The less information it contains, the more effectively it serves that purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance." I don't think that the identity of sister cities is one of the few salient facts that we want readers to carry away from the summary of an article. Unnecessary elongation of the infobox also causes compositional problems, as the infobox pushes down graphics and other boxes in the article body, or sandwiches text between the infobox and left-aligned graphics, contra MOS:IMAGELOCATION. Ammodramus (talk) 18:24, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Any help in resolving an edit war?

Hello! There is a slow-motion edit war going on at the article Largest cities in Europe. The issue is how to count the population of Istanbul: whether to count the population of the entire city, or only the population on the European side of the city. Any input at Talk:Largest cities in Europe to help resolve this edit war or develop consensus would be appreciated. Bragging rights are involved since Istanbul is the largest city in Europe if you count the entire city, and the second-largest if you count only the European side. (Note that this page uses the population within city limits, not the metropolitan area.) I have full-protected the article for 24 hours hoping this can be resolved without anyone getting blocked. Thanks for any help! --MelanieN (talk) 21:13, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

I gave it a shot. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:18, 30 June 2015 (UTC)