Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities/Archive 23
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | Archive 23 |
Good article reassessment for Evanton
Evanton has been nominated for a 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. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 03:47, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Scarborough, Ontario
Scarborough, Ontario has been nominated for a 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. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:35, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Information on poverty, slums and pollution missing on purpose?
I was working on the article on Dhaka today and noticed that it had almost no information at all about problematic aspects of the city. Sure, traffic congestion was mentioned. But there was hardly anything about the fact that about 30% of Dhaka residents live in slums (!!), that access to water and sanitation is very poor for those people, that the city rivers are very polluted, that low-income areas are often affected by flooding (made worse from climate change). I've added a bit of that now.
Also, almost all of the photos showed a glitzy, shining metropolis, nice buildings and so forth but not a balanced picture of what the city really looks like. So I am just wondering: was that on purpose? Is there perhaps even a kind of policy to show cities of the Global South in their best possible light?
I agree that it would be wrong to let all the problematic aspects dominate a city article on Dhaka totally but to sweep them all under the carpet can't be right either. Who are the people editing this article mostly - is it Global North editors, travel agencies, historians or wealthy people from Dhaka who have little contact with the more difficult sides of their city? Two example publications that I used today are here and here.
More info is on the talk page of the Dhaka article but I came here to ask if there is perhaps a kind of policy or quiet consensus about how problem aspects of cities in developing countries should be reflected in their Wikipedia articles. This would also apply to e.g. Nairobi, Delhi. Pinging User:Sadads in case he'd like to comment. EMsmile (talk) 18:31, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
- Dhaka#Demographics looks fine, because the slum topic is a small fraction of the overall size of the article. Maybe renamed the section "People living in slums" to just "Slums"??? • Sbmeirow • Talk • 00:03, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
- This topic is fine as long as there isn't a high percentage of content on this subject matter compared to the overall size of the article. We need to ensure that editors don't abuse this topic in a way that promotes racist or bigoted views. This is related to the opposite topic... afluent rich communities... it is generally frown upon to use lots of overly positive fluffy wording for such communities, in the same way should minimize the use of negative or offsensive terms for poor communities. In general, should stick to facts as much as possible, and minimize personal commentary. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 00:00, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Northallerton
Northallerton has been nominated for a 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. Hog Farm Talk 02:22, 2 March 2024 (UTC)