Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States/Archive 14

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.

There is a discussion on the

NathanPeters406 (talk) 22:32, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

CONSENSUS IN FAVOR

There is consensus in favor of removing these charts from the pages of the states themselves. There is a weak consensus that they should instead be put at the "politics of ___" articles. Closed per request at

WP:ANRFC, if you have an questions about this close please ask me. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 19:40, 21 February 2019 (UTC) (non-admin closure

)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I recently noticed that the State articles have had multiple Federal elections charts added to them. I am not sure the State articles should feature these Federal charts and believe most should be moved to the main articles on elections per state. These charts are causing a few format problems ( like

WP:PROSE is preferred - it should be a chart related to state level elections at best. I propose moving charts like at Massachusetts#Politics to Politics of Massachusetts. What do others think about this? --Moxy (talk

) 16:08, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

• I agree with these points. Carlstak (talk) 16:17, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

• I agree too. I tried to trim the lists at Massachusetts about a month ago and was reverted; another editor raised similar concerns at Talk:Virginia. My main concern, besides the sandwich issues, is that we can show all this stuff at more specific articles per Summary style. Those election map/county chart things are often too specific as they focus on one election in one year, and the gov/pres election results can be shown using just the last few decades - we don't need to go back to the Korean War. Another option might be collapsible lists. AlexiusHoratius 22:17, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

• Thanks for bringing this to the WikiProject, I'm the editor who raised concerns at
  main article fixation, where a user has spent time creating these graphics, and doesn't want to see them buried on subarticles, even if that's a more apropriate place. On Virginia#Politics, I tried to split the baby by trimming the gubenatorial and presidential charts to 1992, and using Template:Stack to get them to stay vertical above one another, but my first preference is to move these charts to either the Politics of (insert state) article, or perhaps Elections in (state).-- Patrick, _oѺ^∞
  20:46, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

• Go for it. GoodDay (talk) 21:45, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

• Wouldn't it be possible just to make them collapsible/mw-collapsible in order to conserve space? Mélencron (talk) 21:42, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

This would be a good idea even if most think it's best to move.--Moxy (talk) 01:30, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

• Also agree that this is too much detail for state articles. Number 57 21:44, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
• Also agree that this is too much detail. Bondegezou (talk) 13:21, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

• I noted this discussion at WikiProject Elections because I'm curious about where (if anywhere) this data should belong longterm. Sounds like users agree with moving the presidential/gubernatorial vote total tables to a subarticle, but should they then be expanded back from the 1950s to earlier elections? What about third parties or independents? Should they be converted to an official template like Template:Compact election box? I've been looking for an equivilant to these charts nationally, and only found the article List of United States presidential elections by popular vote margin. Additionally, I wanted to specifically bring up the SVG box charts of largest counties that can be seen in the screenshot Moxy provided. I think they belong solely on articles like 2016 United States presidential election in (state), but maybe on a states' Elections page if the 2016 election is discussed in the text.-- Patrick, _oѺ^∞ 02:16, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

 You are invited to join the discussion at

There has been a discussion on how to spell the word "aluminum"/"aluminium" at Talk:Charles Martin Hall#Re my revert. It will be greatly appreciated if you see the discussion and provide your opinions.--R8R (talk) 12:29, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Please note that scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 25 February 2019 (UTC) on behalf of the TAFI team

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab)#Attention WikiProjects. We are designing a bot to do auto-assessment (among other tasks) and would appreciate your feedback. Qzekrom (talk) 01:25, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at

At Talk:Undertale#Country_of_origin_and_WikiProjects there is a question over whether the video game Undertale, developed largely by a single American (Toby Fox) who resides in the U.S., should be tagged with this WikiProject. I understand members WikiProject Japan made declarations at this page that video games made by mostly Japanese employees, in Japan, and/or with the company being Japanese are a part of that project.

Also there are other cultural media such as films which have their own projects: In fact American film has a joint task force between WPUS and WPFilm:

The question is whether the same applies for American video games; should every game that is American be a part of this project, or only those in which the country of production is a truly important aspect.

WhisperToMe (talk) 04:31, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Opinions are needed on the following matter:

I have created a stubby new article on the Engagements Clause of the Constitution of the United States. Naturally it needs further work. Michael Hardy (talk) 01:30, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Recently, flags were readded to multiple U.S. city articles (

1. The Manual of Style is not mandatory
2. The cited guideline itself uses the word "may" in italics, suggesting it is optional
3. The flags don’t add to the article in an encyclopedic way
4. The flags bring unnecessary attention to the parameters (city and state)

I’d like to see the community's opinion once and for all of what would be preferred, as there is an overall mixture of both with and without flags on U.S. city articles. IWI (chat) 16:03, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Flags are an option of the infobox templates. You should not remove the flags without a consensus on a given article's talk page. — Maile (talk) 16:35, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

@Maile66: Surely that must mean the opposite too: they shouldn’t be added either without consensus. IWI (chat) 22:04, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

• Comment - Simply, "should flags be permitted in infoboxes". Rich discussions have already occured at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities/US Guideline/Archive 3#flagicons in infobox, Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons/Archive 14#WP:INFOBOXFLAG question, and Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 118#Proposal regarding flag icons in infoboxes, though no consensus was reached. Does this can really need another kick? Magnolia677 (talk) 21:41, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

If editors feel inclined to edit war over something, the only way to stop it is to attempt to gain a consensus. IWI (chat) 17:24, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

• IWI I don't get why a RFC was required in this case, considering this itself is a community talk page and no discussions were held prior. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 18:18, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Several portals are up for deletion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Alhambra, California. They are for smaller cities and communities, mostly in the US. ɱ (talk) 16:36, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

I'm going to begin writing an article on the National Imagery and Mapping Agency Act of 1966. I would appreciate any tips, advice, or guidance. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluebirds030492 (talk • contribs) 23:06, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello fellow editors. A number of articles in

Deontologie jurisdiction jelly mise end discord a because last haute instance? Momedzo75 (talk) 14:25, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

The RfC above Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_United_States#Federal_election_charts_in_State_articles wasn't even posted on Talk:Washington (state). I reverted it there and suggest reverting it else where. If you're going to make changes across so many articles, you need way more participation. Advertise it on the affected talk pages.

Also, it took me about 3 seconds to fix the sandwiching "problem". Seriously, guys. What is up here? --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:20, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Sandwich of text is not fixed in anyway. So what do you object to about the RfC that involved 9 people all agreeing on the main point and was advertised in many places? What did they get wrong? Do you think federal stats not in pros should be on state articles and that text sandwiching on many pages is not a problem? Personaly I think an RfC should have been made before spaming this all over not the other way around. Was added all over then reverted by many all over thus we had this talk to confirm why most editors reverted the new additions.--Moxy (talk) 22:44, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

What text is sandwiched? A sandwich is two pieces of bread with something in the middle. There’s nothing to the left of the text in that section. Even if there was, you don’t delete content wholesale. Nobody even tried to fix the formatting.

It wasn’t even a real RfC. A neutral question is one of the minimum requirements. And notifying affected parties. If you want to do this, you have to try again, and first do due diligence. Discuss the problem and attempt solutions. The MOS guidelines aren’t some inviolable policy that justifies such extreme action. —Dennis Bratland (talk) 23:26, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

• Noting was deleted ...was moved as per the RfC that was advertised here at the parent project and the related noticeboards. The box's still sandwiches the text to the left fragmenting sentence structure for many people....even on my 60 inch TV. So now that that is clear what real objections are there? Do you want us to make another RFC see if another 100% of the people agree again? Do you believe the argument that these Federal related charts should be in state articles even after all in the small RfC would change? Thus far your reasoning for reverting the decision of a RFC doesn't hold much merit. ..as no content was lost and the accessibility problem re-implemented on this top-level article.--Moxy (talk) 23:50, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

• MOS:SANDWICH says "a­void sand­wich­ing text be­tween two im­ages or charts that face each oth­er; or be­tween an im­age and in­fo­box, nav­i­ga­tion tem­plate, or sim­i­lar". It doesn't mention anything like this. You're complaining about two tables side by side. The apparent problem in the image you posted is an artifact of viewing the article in a large font in a narrow web browser window. Anything can be made to look bad with the a given set of defaults on a given display. On mine the text column looks fine, it's much wider than the two tables.

  And that's all fixable. Change the text size of the tables. Align them stacked. Consider keeping only one of the two tables. Arrange them horizontally across the bottom of the section. Options abound. --Dennis Bratland (talk

  ) 02:47, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Yes yes you got it lets bold that last part or sim­i­lar ....So what about the main point of the RfC? All think they should be moved.....have an oppnion on that??--Moxy (talk) 11:23, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

I created a new task force for Wikipedia:WikiProject Numismatics focusing on American currency. The task force, Wikipedia:WikiProject Numismatics/American currency task force, is still starting up and does not have many members. If anyone is interested in helping, feel free to do so. - ZLEA _T\^C 15:25, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

An RfC has been opened at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television)#RFC: What disambiguation should shows from the United States and United Kingdom use?. Additional participation is welcomed. -- Netoholic @ 18:59, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

I'm trying to get a PDF map of

Maybe someone here knows the census site better than me, but is there another place to get PDF maps of census-designated places (as of the 2010 census)? WhisperToMe (talk) 02:56, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.

– Sent on behalf of Headbomb. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi--I'm hoping some of you can help with beefing up the articles for African Origins and Voyages: The Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade Database. Thank you so much! Drmies (talk) 16:34, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Donald Trump is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Donald Trump until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:13, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Barack Obama is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Barack Obama until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:16, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Maine is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Maine until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:22, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Hello,

I have recently introduced this offer to the reward board and thought that it would be of interest to this WikiProject. To sign up leave a message on my talk page

All of the U.S. Presidents to Featured status

A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Cold War is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Cold War until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:12, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Country music is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Country music until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:01, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

I have nominated

• Talk:Jimmy_Carter_rabbit_incident#Correction_needed

Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:47, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Delaware is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Delaware until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:09, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Please note that scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 10 June 2019 (UTC) on behalf of the TAFI team

A discussion regarding inclusion of recent news reports regarding political activity about abortion in Waskom, Texas is taking place at Talk:Waskom, Texas. Your participation is encouraged. John from Idegon (talk) 04:17, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

i wonder who he is +19196263815 so confused?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.147.33.51 (talk) 09:14, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Please see Talk:Waskom,_Texas#The_abortion_ban WhisperToMe (talk) 08:46, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Members of this project may be interested in this discussion. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:16, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Category:American cattlemen, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. TSventon (talk) 15:04, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

The RfC located here may be of interest to the members of this project. Beyond My Ken (talk) 14:55, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Would appreciate feedback from anyone who has experience with U.S. census related articles. Merging duplicate article

Aegreen, I would be willing to help you with this process, as it does appear this is a good candidate for a merger. I see that you have created the discussion for the merger per WP:MERGE. If, after a week or so there is no opposition to this merger, we can follow the process outlined on the aforementioned page to complete the merge.

As far as reconciling what counties and towns belong in the CSA, I feel it is best to use the definition of the CSA from the US Census Bureau, and go from there. Let me know if you have any questions or other concerns. --Willy No1lakersfan (Talk - Edits) 22:48, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Willy - believe the most recent CSA map from the

U.S. Census website is from the 2012 economic census.[1] Will circle back in a week to move forward. — aegreen (talk • email

) 19:58, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Perhaps a member of this project could have a look at the importance rating for this article. Given that mass shootings occur with a depressing regularity, I doubt that this particular one merits a "high importance" rating. Thanks. --Randykitty (talk) 07:20, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

There is a

John Bernat Class of '61 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:9001:4F10:89BC:BC67:4450:4163:BDC6 (talk) 21:05, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

This RfC may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:38, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

It has been proposed that Veterans benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder in the United States be renamed and moved to Veterans benefits for posttraumatic stress disorder in the United States. Please see my rationale for changing the title (removing the hyphen in "post-traumatic" is the only change proposed) at Talk:Veterans benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder in the United States#Requested move 27 August 2019. Please discuss on that Talk page too. Thanks!   - Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) (I am a man. The traditional male pronouns are fine.) 16:31, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Recently, I noted that some of the content about

• talk links history): Special:Diff/682619084/912949236
• talk links history): Special:Diff/909824345/912954601
• Massachusetts health care reform (edit talk links history): Special:Diff/901904756/912699623
• Health insurance coverage in the United States (edit talk links history): Special:Diff/905346028/912738497
• Health insurance in the United States (edit talk links history): Special:Diff/910497164/912742742
• Medicaid (edit talk links history): Special:Diff/909480199/909790623

I brought this to the neutral point of view noticeboard at

Hello. The article name is too broad and does not seem to name a specific event. By far the most popular proper name for this event I have seen is what I believe the article should be renamed, "The Great United States Housing Bubble" This title would paint an accurate and definable name for a singular event and focuses on the magnitude and extent of the event. It would greatly help students and researchers to be able to find information about this event without being confused as to weather or not it is about housing bubbles throughout the history of the United States, and it would settle misunderstandings as to what the event is called. This is just a suggestion, however. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.111.221.222 (talk • contribs) 23:26, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

There is a

Greetings, for this WPs Assessment page, I added a section with link to WikiProject United States/Popular pages. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 18:59, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

The North Canadian River is the same as the Beaver River (Oklahoma) that changes names at the Oklahoma state line. It seems this could be covered with alternate names instead of two different articles on the same river with interchangeable names.

• See: Talk:Beaver River (Oklahoma)#Same river different names. Otr500 (talk) 09:43, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

After discussions spread over the last couple of years, we have finally updated Wikipedia:External links#Links in lists with some new advice about how to format external links in some stand-alone lists. This format is not mandatory, but it may be helpful in some cases. Please feel free to try it out in pages that you think are appropriate, and leave feedback on the guideline's talk page. Thanks, WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:08, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

I requested

A discussion is taking place as to whether Wikipedia:US State Portal Metrics is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:US State Portal Metrics until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:02, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

I have been working on the article, List of plantations in North Carolina. I found that there are two categories for plantations: Category:Plantations in North Carolina and Category:Plantation houses in North Carolina. This same structure is repeated at Category:Plantations in the United States by state and Category:Plantation houses in the United States by state, as well as in each of the states. I looked at other states, also, and saw a similar pattern. I tried to find all the plantation articles in North Carolina and put them in one category, but then I though this might be something that should be discussed in the United State project.

It doesn't seem to be necessary to have categories for both "Plantation houses" and "Plantations". A plantation is not a plantation without a house. The articles that exist talk about the house, its history, the people who built or lived at the house, and the land and crops on the plantation.

I would like to recommend that the "Category:Plantations in state" and "Category:Plantations in the United States by state" be used instead of "Category:Plantation houses in state" and "Category:Plantation houses in the United States by state". I apologize if this has been discussed before and I am not aware of it or if there is some other reason for keeping dual categories. This would also make it much easier to map all of the plantations under one category. This would require some work to move the existing plantation articles to one category for each state and to delete the other category. It might also be useful to add a U.S. and State History categories, as well as History of slavery categories, to the Plantation categories.

User:G._Moore talk 04:04, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

	US Banknote Contest
	November-December 2019
There are an estimated 30,000 different varieties of United States banknotes, yet only a fraction of these are represented on Wikimedia Commons in the form of 2D scans. Additionally, Colonial America, the Confederate States, the Republic of Texas, multiple states and territories, communities, and private companies have issued banknotes that are in the public domain today but are absent from Commons. In the months of November and December, WikiProject Numismatics will be running a cross-wiki upload-a-thon, the 2019 US Banknote Contest. The goal of the contest is to increase the number of US banknote images available to content creators on all Wikimedia projects. Participants will claim points for uploading and importing 2D scans of US banknotes, and at the end of the contest all will receive awards. Whether you want to claim the Gold Wiki or you just want to have fun, all are invited to participate. If you do not want to receive invitations to future US Banknote Contests, follow the instructions here

Sent by ZLEA at 23:30, 19 October 2019 (UTC) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk)

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:25, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Greetings! I have recently relisted a requested move discussion at Talk:Mikha'il Na'ima, regarding a page relating to this WikiProject. Discussion and opinions are invited. Thanks, comrade waddie96 ★ (talk) 09:45, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, can this group review

• Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
• Hammerax (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs|google) AfD discussion Second nomination
  

Serial

FYI, there's a request to create a new task force at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/African-American task force -- 67.70.33.184 (talk) 13:29, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at

Hi, can this group review Draft:Mike Hatton? Thank You all. Powertolife (talk) 10:40, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

The input of editors regarding a content dispute at Skowhegan, Maine would be appreciated. Please see Talk:Skowhegan, Maine#Mascot issue. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 00:08, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

An editor has requested that {{subst:linked|United States Navy good conduct variation}} be moved to {{subst:#if:|{{subst:linked|{{{2}}}}}|another page}}{{subst:#switch: project |user | USER = . Since you had some involvement with 'United States Navy good conduct variation', you |#default = , which may be of interest to this WikiProject. You}} are invited to participate in [[{{subst:#if:|{{subst:#if:|#{{{section}}}|}}|{{subst:#if:|Talk:United States Navy good conduct variation#{{{section}}}|{{subst:TALKPAGENAME:United States Navy good conduct variation}}}}}}|the move discussion]]. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:18, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

The article Assistant Secretary for International Affairs needs significant improvement. The article title doesn't list which agency this position is a member of, the introduction says it's a DHS position, and the body mentions Theodore J. Garrish, who is the Energy Department's assistant secretary for international affairs (a separate position, and he never served in the DHS).

Also, there are multiple "assistant secretaries for international affairs" throughout the federal government, not just the DHS or DoE. In short, this article is a mess and needs improvement -- is might need to become a disambiguation page or be moved. --1990'sguy (talk) 00:05, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Hello! I have recently created a bot to remove completed

Sent on behalf of Trialpears (talk) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:34, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Are we still in the Reagan era? This table gives the time period for the Reagan era as "1981–??", implying that we do not know when the Reagan era ends because we are still in it.

If we take what this template says literally, we are continuing to live in the same circumstances of the

There are comments at Talk:National Hockey League#Article issues for anyone interested. Otr500 (talk) 13:55, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Is New York City located in southeast New York? -- GoodDay (talk) 20:51, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

I created a section on

Cite: Peter W. Wood, "‘Cancel Culture’ Comes to Science", Wall Street Journal (January 13, 2020): A17.   - Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) (I am a man. The traditional male pronouns are fine.) 10:47, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Opinions are needed on the following matter:

− Chairing Cross, Arizona, Arizona First multiple town nomination for deletion. Was a Speedy Keep, nomination withdrawn. I don't know why they didn't include them all. What they have done is repackaged their effort: 'Old wine in new bottles.' No longer being sold by the case.
Reminds me of Massive Attack, one of my favorite bands. But I digress.

− − A couple of these are not presently AFDs, but they all need to be improved.

−

−

Coal Mine Mesa, Arizona (Second nomination)

−

• Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

−

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion Coal Mine Mesa, Arizona (Second nomination)

−

Coconino, Arizona

(Second nomination)

−

• Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

−

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion Coconino, Arizona (Second nomination)

−

Corva, Arizona (Second nomination)

−

• Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

−

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion Corva, Arizona (Second nomination}

−

Cosnino, Arizona (Second nomination)

−

• Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

−

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion Cosnino, Arizona (Second nomination)

−

Coyote Basin Ranch, Arizona (Second nomination)

−

• Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

−

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Coyote Basin Ranch (Second nomination)

−

Cucamonga Junction, Arizona (Second nomination)

−

• Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

−

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cucamonga Junction, Arizona(Second nomination)

−

Darling, Arizona (Second nomination)

−

• Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

−

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Darling, Arizona (Second nomination)

−

Daze, Arizona (Second nomination)

−

• Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

−

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daze, Arizona(Second nomination)

−

Durfee Crossing, Arizona (Second nomination)

−

• Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

−

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Durfee Crossing, Arizona (Second nomination)

−

Echinique Place, Arizona (Second nomination)

−

• Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

−

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Echinique Place, Arizona (Second nomination)

− − A couple of those articles are not up for a second nomination. They appear in red.

− I know that Darling, Arizona has lots more sources. I have not done homework on the rest of the articles. All the AFD discussions started with a startling omission, and only peripherally mentioned (buried) the prior AFDs. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:21, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

This is not canvassing. Indeed, I have no idea who will read it or how they will react (if at all). Simple notice. Simple recitation of the facts. What are you hiding? And why? 7&6=thirteen (☎) 22:17, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

It might help if each of those articles were tagged with a Stub template. Category:Geography stubs Wikipedia allows stubs. Also, this is not canvassing by any stretch of the imagination. Projects generally list AFD, CFD and other problem issues for articles related to their subject. I.e. WikiProject Women in Red. Articles get rescued all the time. — Maile (talk) 01:07, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

I'm currently nominating Bonanza City, New Mexico for good article; the article is currently classed as a stub, which is technically speaking grounds for an insta-failure. I know it's unlikely the article will actually be insta-failed, but I don't want to take the chance of having to wait for months only to need to relist it again. Could someone please bump this up to start-class to eliminate this possibility? Spirit of Eagle (talk) 02:47, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

 Done — Maile (talk) 02:49, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello! I've submitted a request to update the Early life and education section of the Lee Fixel article as part of my work with Beutler Ink. Lee Fixel is an American venture capitalist and investor and I'm hoping to update some straightforward biographical information. You can view my full request here, which seeks to improve flow and fix a few inaccurate details. Will someone please review this request? Given my COI, I'm asking independent editors to confirm accuracy, neutrality, and verifiability. I'll happily address any questions or concerns that may arise. Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 17:44, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello all! I am the writer for the WikiProject Report section of the

@Puddleglum2.0: Sure, I am interested. Please sign me up! ωικιωαrrιorᑫᑫ1ᑫ 14:36, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks WikiWarrior9919! Can you wait a couple days while I set up the questions? I ask so early because other Projects didn't reply for like a month. I'll give you the links on your talk page soon, thank you so much for signing up! Puddleglum ^2.0 23:44, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Alright, you're welcome. ωικιωαrrιorᑫᑫ1ᑫ 16:49, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

@Puddleglum2.0:, I would definitely be interested in answering any questions. Please feel free to contact me any time. thanks!! --Sm8900 (talk) 21:49, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

cool. @WikiWarrior9919: and Sm8900 (+future volunteers): I'll drop y'all a line when I'm ready. Thanks so much. Puddleglum ^2.0 00:50, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

There is a discussion at Talk:Alex Chilton#Article issues that might be of interest to members of this project. Otr500 (talk) 10:22, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi. I would like to create some kind of collaborative workspace where coordinators or members of various WikiProjects would gather and provide updates and information on what is going on at each wikiproject, i.e. regarding their latest efforts, projects, and where interested editors can get involved.

For those of you at this very active WikiProject, your input would be very helpful, so I wanted to get your input on whether you'd be interested in helping me to make this happen.

we are discussing this proposal right now at:

* Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Idea for new community workspace

Please feel free to let me know what you think of this idea, and please let me know your preference, regarding the options above. if you do not see any need for this idea, that is totally fine. However, I think that the majority of editors lack awareness of where the truly active editing is taking place and at which WikiProjects, and I would like to do whatever I can to help make people more aware of where the activity is, what they can do to help, and also which areas of Wikipedia offer ideas and efforts that might help them in their own editing activities. Please feel free to let me know.

• Would you be interested in an idea of this nature?
• If so, which option below seems most feasible to you?
  • Create a new page/talk page at the existing WikiProject Council, where members of various WikiProject can gather to offer updates, information and ideas on the latest efforts at each of their own WikiProject, such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Town Hall.
  • Create an entirely new WikiProject with an inclusive name such as
    • Wikipedia:WIkiProject Town Hall,
    • Wikipedia:WikiProject Bulletin Board,
    • Wikipedia:WikiProject Water Cooler
  • Create a new collaborative page or forum, but not as a new WIkiProject, i.e. with some name like
    • Wikipedia:Town Hall
      or
    • Wikipedia:Water Cooler
  • Create a new sub-page in my own userspace, such as User:Sm8900/Town Hall
  • Create a subpage at an umbrella-type WikiProject that already covers a broad topical area, such as Wikipedia:WikiProject History/Town Hall

thanks. --Sm8900 (talk) 18:50, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi WP USA. Editors are invited to participate in Talk:Iranian Revolution#RfC: Iranian Revolution "supported by the United States". Thanks, Levivich 07:55, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Drew Anderson to be moved to Drew Anderson (outfielder). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 00:33, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Hijackers in the September 11 attacks#Merge discussion . RightCowLeftCoast (Moo) 02:30, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

here. —RMCD bot

01:53, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Taliban and Afghanistan Relations

When searching up key words like Afghanistan, it only has the years from 2001-2014. Why is that? We recently had a peace agreement with the Taliban, which may or may not be a huge step in real peaceJorgevizcarrondo (talk) 20:46, 23 March 2020 (UTC).Jorgevizcarrondo (talk) 20:46, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Help!

2020 United States Census

Help! Tens of thousands (or more) will be turning to Wikipedia for information about the

2020 United States Census. The article needs a good amount of work to bring it up to speed. Thanks!   - Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk)

(I'm a man—traditional male pronouns are fine.) 18:08, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Updating County Website URLs

I am working on a project to research and correct as many county web sites as possible and would like to integrate it with relevant Wikipedia pages such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_counties_and_county_equivalents.

I am consolidating lists of web sites I have obtained from the US Census Bureau and the National Association of Counties. These lists can be used to help fill in some gaps in the Infoboxes that appear in Wikipedia pages. All of these Infoboxes could be manually editied, but I am hoping there is a more automated technique for batch updating and then maintaining these. My team will also be researching cities (and other types of municipalities), school districts and special districts.

Would anyone on Project United States be interested in discussing this with me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joffemd (talk • contribs) 22:20, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Redirects to small towns

I've recently created redirects like these:

• Artanna - to - Artanna, Ohio
• Austinburg - to - Austinburg, Ohio
• Badgertown - to - Badgertown, Ohio

I notice that such redirects already exist (e.g.

Deandale) yet I'm not sure if it makes sense to create such redirects. Are they useful? —  Ark25  (talk

) 01:41, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

@

Brookfield Township, Tioga County, Pennsylvania

. Whether either of the tiny communities in Ohio or Pennsylvania or the township in Ohio is the primary topic is something to consider on case by case basis. Personally, I'd lean towards no primary topic.

You might want to reconsider some other similar titles that you recently redirected and then created a separate disambiguation page. For example

Forgy as a redirect to the virtually non-existent (except in a historical sense) community of Forgy, Ohio and the separate page Forgy (disambiguation) -- which is essentially a surname page. I would suggest that in such cases there is no primary topic and the disambiguation page should be place at the base name. older ≠ wiser

13:39, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

PS, for cases where there is a

WP:NOTUSA). Also, and I hesitate to suggest this, but in addition to using the Wikipedia search function to find other ambiguous topics, you might also consider checking the GNIS domestic name search function (which is no longer being updated) or its replacement The National Map. Note that GNIS may list many "false" positives in that not everything that exists in the GNIS database is necessarily notable in a Wikipedia sense. older ≠ wiser

13:58, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

@Bkonrad: Thank you for your detailed answer! It's quite clear this is way too complicated for me so I give up. —  Ark25  (talk) 14:45, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

@Ark25: I didn't mean to discourage you. I'd only suggest to default to placing the disambiguation page at the base name unless it is really obvious that there is in fact a clear primary topic. No need to worry too much about formatting or layout. older ≠ wiser 14:54, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

@

Austinburg, Pennsylvania. Wihout doing that in the first place, I would create a lot of redirects where in fact there should be disambiguation pages, and then my work would actually spoil things instead of helping. And this is far too much work and too complicated for me - I have no idea how to make this semi-automatic. Only after completing this first step it is possible to make it semi-automatic the creation of the links I was asking about. Without automatizing a part of the work, this is something that takes ages. —  Ark25  (talk

) 15:11, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

@

mentioned. older ≠ wiser

15:31, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

@Bkonrad: Yet without creating such redirects, it is very hard to know if you have to create a redirect of a disambiguation page.

For example, in the first step, the redirect Clarktown, New Jersey must be created (to redirect to Hamilton Township, Atlantic County, New Jersey.

And then, in the second step, using the template {{

intitle}}, you can search for "intitle:"Clarktown, " and you will discover that you have to create a disambiguation page. This second step can be done semi-automatic - like for example creating a list like this. —  Ark25  (talk

) 15:43, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

@

intitle}} would not help. In such cases you need to do a full search for articles containing the term and evaluate whether that particular usage is worth including on the dab page. For example, people or fictional characters with a given name are rarely worth calling out on a disambiguation page unless it is a truly uncommon given name or they are commonly known mononymously by the given name alone. Similarly, people or fictional characters with a surname that are only briefly mentioned in an article generally shouldn't be included. Place names are a little more flexible, but obscure historical names generally can be mentioned on the disambiguation page, but there is little value to creating a redirect for the term. older ≠ wiser

16:06, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

@Bkonrad: "you need to do a full search for articles containing the term and evaluate.." - And that means even more work :). Really, this can take decades so this is clearly not for me. —  Ark25  (talk) 16:14, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Good article review needed for Veterans benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder in the United States

I nominated

Culture, sociology and psychology subtopic. If you have not conducted a good article review before, take a look at the good article reviewer instructions to see what is involved. If you decide to conduct the review (thank you!), please be sure to read Markworthen/Veterans-benefits-GA-nom where I provide some important history/background info about the article, e.g., 2015 SME (subject matter experts) review; 2015 GA nomination feedback; 2019 Peer Review; 2020 Guild of Copy Editors review, etc. Much appreciated   - Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk)

(I'm a man—traditional male pronouns are fine.) 16:33, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Good Article reassessment for United States

Not sure if this project has been notified, but an editor has opened an individual GAR for United States. It can be found at Talk:United States/GA4. AIRcorn (talk) 03:40, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Categorizing files on Commons

A high proportion of the nearly 20,000 talk pages in Category:File-Class United States articles belong to files that were moved to Commons and deleted, typically in 2011 or 2012. Is there any reason for these Commons files to continue to be project-tagged on en.wikipedia? Unless this serves some purpose for the project (and if it does, I would be eager to know how it is used), I propose to get a bot to delete any talk page in the category without a corresponding file on en.wikipedia. Local talk pages for Commons files generally lead to either split discussions or, more commonly, invite occasional comments that no one sees or responds to. Thoughts? -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 05:05, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Anyone? -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 01:13, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

@Black Falcon: I don't think there's anyone left on this project who would know how to answer you question. I don't know how to answer it, and I've been around more than a decade. The editor who created WikiProject United States is no longer active. I would say go with your own instincts on this. — Maile (talk) 02:49, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, Maile. I have placed a request at Wikipedia:Bot requests/Archive 80#WikiProject United States files on Commons. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 23:22, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Mike Jackson

Mike Jackson (right-handed pitcher), 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. Therapyisgood (talk) 20:06, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Ryan Hanigan

Ryan Hanigan, 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. Therapyisgood (talk) 21:41, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

List of known cases of COVID-19 in the United States

There's a

Draft:List of known cases of COVID-19 in the United States; it hasn't been updated since the beginning of March. The list criteria need discussing, so any interested parties could participate. -- 65.94.170.207 (talk

) 11:23, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Moved to

Draft talk:List of known cases of COVID-19 in the United States

50,000 Destubbing Challenge Focus of the Week

Hello there. This is an invitation to join the

Encyclopædius

12:10, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Can we add honorific prefixes and suffixes for U.S. presidents and figures of importance?

Can we add honorific prefixes and suffixes for American presidents and figures of importance?

The following I think should be discussed on this topic:

1. In their respective infobox, Presidents of the U.S. such as
   General of the Army
   in his infobox, but it should be expanded to others who have not yet received such.
2. Honorific suffixes such as (ex: PMF) should be added to individuals who have earned the merit

The reason I bring this up is because Wikipedia as a source of information is crucial to how people do research on schoolwork, projects and programs. The addition of honorific prefixes and suffixes can allow for the researcher at first glance to understand the importance of such person, and what they have earned in their lifetime. This is applied to international politicians, and acts as a mean to let the reader see the figures's prestige and national merits/honors right next to their picture.

talk

) 11:21, 26 April 2020 (UTC)07:05, 26 April 2020 (UTC-4, EDT)

This is the Wikipedia policy on the naming of people: Naming conventions (people). — Maile (talk) 13:00, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

United States non-interventionism listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for United States non-interventionism to be moved to Non-interventionism in the United States. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 06:47, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

A few states missing from template

 You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:WikiProject United States#A few states missing. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 06:44, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

FYI - relevant discussion

I've proposed a CSD criterion targeting the worst and least notable of the GNIS permastubs. See here.

talk

) 07:08, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

RfC at Alliance Defending Freedom

This RfC may be of interest to the members of this group. Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:57, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Second American Revolution

Should this really be a stand-alone article? Doug Weller talk 19:14, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

I say no. The article's second sentence says, "Rhetorical or hyperbolic references to a Second American Revolution have been made on a number of occasions throughout the history of the United States." That's thin gruel to justify an entire article, and besides, I think it's downright misleading, as the title gives the impression at first sight that two American Revolutionary Wars were fought. Carlstak (talk)

I prodded it.

[majestic titan]

02:29, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@

[majestic titan]

05:31, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Missing/broken references

I'm trying to make a dent in

harvnb}} and similar have missing full citations or have some other problems. You can check these instructions

to have error messages enabled (Svick's script is the simplest to use, but Trappist's script is a bit more refined if you're interested in doing deeper cleanup).

In particular, the following articles could use some of your attention

• 13th Maine Volunteer Infantry Regiment
• 59th Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry Regiment
• 1808 United States Senate election in Massachusetts
• 1838 Mormon War
• 1880 United States House of Representatives elections
• 1880 United States presidential election in Virginia
• 1884 and 1885 United States Senate elections
• 1888 United States presidential election
• 1898 and 1899 United States Senate elections
• 1904 and 1905 United States Senate elections
• 1914 United States Senate elections
• 1916 Massachusetts gubernatorial election
• 1917 Massachusetts gubernatorial election
• 1918 Massachusetts gubernatorial election
• 1924 Massachusetts gubernatorial election
• 1926 United States Senate election in Arizona
• 1931 Chicago housing protests
• 1932 United States Senate election in Arizona
• 1933 Banking Act
• 1936 United States presidential election
• 1937 United States Senate special election in Arkansas
• 1943 BRUSA Agreement
• 1946 United States House of Representatives elections
• 1968 Arkansas gubernatorial election
• 1968 United States presidential election
• 1970 Arizona gubernatorial election
• 1980 eruption of Mount St. Helens
• 2004 American League Championship Series

The cause is often copy-pasting a short reference from another article without copy-pasting the full reference. If you can find where things were copy-pasted from, you can usually find what the full reference is.

Thanks for any help you can give!

b

} 15:50, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

2020 census, city/county demographics, and what to do with 2000/2010 data

Has there been any discussion of how we will incorporate the new demographic data that will be released in the not-too-far future? This also provides a good opportunity to think of ways to improve the current presentation of 2000/2010 data, and the question of simply removing 2000 data altogether.

talk

) 00:17, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

To elaborate, the decisions to be made and some potential options:

1. What to do with 2000 census data blurbs?
   1. Remove immediately
   2. Remove once 2020 census data is added to articles
   3. Shrink it down in size, rewrite it, or otherwise change it, either immediately or once 2020 data is added
   4. Leave as is
2. What to do with 2010 census data blurbs?
   1. Remove once 2020 census data is added to articles
   2. Shrink it down in size, rewrite it, or otherwise change it, either immediately or once 2020 data is added
   3. Leave as is
3. How to present 2020 census data?
   1. What data should be included? What data should be left out? Should some of it be presented in graph or chart form instead of prose?
   2. Should communities of different sizes have blurbs with different levels of detail? For example, Floriston, California, a community of 73 people, had five paragraphs of demographic data before I edited it down to one paragraph while making general improvements to the article. Chicken, Alaska, which had 17 residents at the time of the 2000 census, at one point had four paragraphs of demographic data. There are thousands of tiny communities like this in the US.
   3. Should some data categories be included for some types of communities but not others? For example: including the fully detailed age breakdown for military bases, retirement communities, and other communities with interesting/unusual age distributions, while only including median age, percent under 18, and percent over 65 for communities with normal age distributions.

At some point there should be a multi-part RFC on this stuff once we've had a chance to bounce some ideas around. The 2000 and 2010 data was awkwardly written in many ways and we have an opportunity to do it better this time around; this also serves as an opportunity to determine whether we will really want 3 sets of census data, some of it 20 years out of date, on almost every US community page in less than a year's time. This whole process will affect something like 50,000 articles so it's important we have a plan. I've only been active again for the past two months however, so it's very possible these discussions are already happening and I'm just out of the loop.

talk

) 04:08, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

I think the number is more like 30,000, though that doesn't affect things much.

There is an interesting possibility of using a template (which already exists), see previous discussion at WikiProject Cities for more information. One of the things we could do with that is something like {{

US census

|year=2000|total population=3,456 etc....}} could have behaviour defined on the year, so that we switch previous census results to a more summary style. There are pros and cons with this approach.

There are also US Census estimates, mid-decade and, I think, for some other years for some places.

Of course there are pre-2000 censuses that are not as easily available in electronic form. Ideally I'd like to see this data made available (maybe via Wikisource and/or Wikidata) and have better demographic sections, avoiding recentism.

In many cases (but not by proportion) there is enough information to have a Demographics of Foo article.

Just some thoughts.

All the best: Rich Farmbrough 10:07, 25 May 2020 (UTC).

gunie

giune are not rel — Preceding unsigned comment added by 105.112.75.141 (talk) 15:35, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Political appointments by Donald Trump

It would be much appreciated if editors would watch and periodically update Political appointments by Donald Trump and its sub-articles. This is a useful article, but it's neglected and becoming very out-of-date. --1990'sguy (talk) 16:33, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Inactive subprojects

I see that there are a number of

Houston, and Jacksonville are marked as inactive. Some, like WP:IA, have been marked as inaactive since September 2017. I suggest they be fully merged into WP:US along with the other states and cities that are part of the WP:US template. – Muboshgu (talk

) 19:23, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

I don't see the need to merge state projects into the national. I'd leave them alone to allow for granularity of assessment. Imzadi 1979 → 03:35, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

The Stamp Act related in today's terms.

The article states that the retention of ten thousand British soldiers after the seven-year war, who were politically connected costs approximately 33 million pounds in today's value. Well, this works out to be 3,300 pounds, an amount that is not excessive. Was the burden of 10,000 troops that excessive or was it a small number of troops? Please help me understand the finances of the equation that led to a revolution.2601:14D:80:BD0:C548:E6B8:2A14:58C5 (talk) 17:36, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[email protected]

RfC on Turning Point USA

An RfC which may be of interest to the members of this project can be found here. Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:14, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Featured article length & Laura Harrier

FAC Laura Harrier is currently in a standstill. One editor supported the promotion to FA status but the current editor believes the article is too short to be a Featured Article. Could anyone assist with this article or quickly look over it for a review, or if not interested in reviewing it, let me know if it is indeed too short please? Factfanatic1 (talk) 13:35, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Request for new quality rating of Thorncrown Chapel article

I revised and added new content to this article, and would like to submit it for a new project quality rating up from Stub-Class. Thanks and gig 'em! Doghouse09 (talk) 18:36, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

 Done — Maile (talk) 19:24, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Chris Gragg FAR

I have nominated

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. Tonystewart14 (talk

) 03:30, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Move request discussion: Title for the Suicide of Kurt Cobain article

Opinions are needed on the following: Talk:Suicide of Kurt Cobain/Archive 1#Requested move 27 July 2020. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 03:23, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Hurricane Willa

Hello all, I just wanted to ask if anyone would be willing to review Hurricane Willa. It is currently a featured article candidate and was quite an impactful storm for Mexico. Although almost all of the impact was in Mexico, the storm did cause some bad flooding near Galveston, Texas. Noah^Talk 20:42, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

Inclusion of presidential election data in U.S. county articles

One editor is removing the presidential election results from the Rockdale County, Georgia article and claims there is no consensus for their inclusion, despite the fact that every other article on a US county contains presidential election results. I see no reason to remove them from any county article; they're useful information. Thoughts? Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 23:25, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Ongoing Discussion at 2016 United States presidential election in the District of Columbia

There is an ongoing discussion at Talk:2016 United States presidential election in the District of Columbia#GamerKiller2347's Opinion on Trump in the Infobox about the inclusion of Donald Trump in the infobox. GamerKiller2347 (talk) 00:20, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Need to fix

Template:History of the United States

talk ~ contribs

) 17:24, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

RfC on Project Veritas

Please see the RfC here, which may be of interest to members of this project. (Disclosure: I am employed by Project Veritas.) Sal at PV (talk) 02:43, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Content about Obama-Romney debate in “Second Cold War”

There is a discussion about info related to Obama and Romney used in the “Second Cold War” article. Your input there is welcome. George Ho (talk) 01:13, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

GAR notice

James McCune Smith, 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. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 23:55, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Talk:American Descendants of Slavery#Semi-protected edit request

Needs attention from someone uninvolved. Doug Weller talk 14:40, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Carter County Oklahoma Politics Chart

The numbers presented in the Carter County, Oklahoma Politics Chart are clearly incorrect in part or in whole. There are MORE Democrats than Republicans but the Republican percent of the total is higher. Further, I cannot get the numbers to add up to the total reported. I do not have access to the data so I cannot provide a correction.

I am Bob Darcy, [email protected] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bdarcy (talk • contribs) 02:51, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Department of the Interior team photo

Just a heads up that I uploaded 2 photos of members of the DOI in 2017. People may find it useful for illustrating some BLPs and related articles. In addition, it would be great if people could help identify some of the people in the photo--I'm afraid I'm unfamiliar. Jlevi (talk) 12:51, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

How do I archive all of the references in the article Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis?

So the article Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis apparently has more references than are allowed to archive. Is it possible to request that a bot archive all of the references, please? I tried the "Fix Dead Links" tool thorough the article's Page/History. The tool told me there are too many dead links for that tool to work. Factfanatic1 (talk) 15:30, 16 August 2020 (UTC)