Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States/Archive 15
 | 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 10 | ← | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 |
Flagging Edit Request on AARP Talk Page
Hello – I’m sharing this post in the hopes of getting an editor’s feedback on the changes proposed to AARP article on Oct. 1, 2021 (“Edit Request: History and Advocacy Sections”). Please note that I proposed this edit for FleishmanHillard on behalf of AARP as a paid editor and I am aware of the COI guidelines. Please let me know of any questions or comments as you review. Thanks for your time and consideration. Justin Goldsborough (talk) 16:49, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
Wikimedia Discord server for the United States
I have created a proposal/discussion about creating a dedicated Wikimedia Discord server for the United States on Meta. Please see and comment about the proposal and your interest there. Lectrician1 (talk) 00:26, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- I have created the server for those who want to join: https://discord.gg/MEntkrzz3U Lectrician1 (talk) 04:15, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- By doing so, you are creating a cabal. Discussions about Wikipedia should be held on-wiki, if only for transparency. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:31, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Collaborating off of Wikipedia is not necessarily a cabal especially if the platform is public. Or do you think Wikipedia:Discord is illegitimate too? I don't see an issue as long as our guidelines against canvassing are followed. Elli (talk | contribs) 21:55, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Redrose64 I completely recognize the benefit of talking on-wiki vs. Discord. I would prefer all discussion to happen on the wiki as well. However, I find that Discord provides an easier and faster interface to communicate with fellow editors than the wiki does. Because of this, editors are able to be more-productive and actually contribute to the project more than if they just used the wiki to communicate. I have saved myself probably tens of hours because of the Wikimedia communities on Discord and Telegram. Yes, Discord is not open like the wiki is and does not easily provide history about discussions, however, anyone's still able to join it (so it's not a cabal) and it's not like there are critical discussions happening there (those always should happen on-wiki). Despite these downsides, I see having a Discord server as a net-positive to the movement. I hope that we can develop convenient communication tools for the wiki some day so that it becomes as convenient as Discord. Lectrician1 (talk) 21:59, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- By that logic, editathons and meetups are also cabals, not to mention Discord and IRC. I find it very hard to take seriously your accusation that any off-wiki activity is "creating a cabal". That borders on absurd and shows zero appreciation of the nuance between appropriate and non-appropriate off-wiki communication. We have rules about canvassing, and they must be respected, but they absolutely do not forbid things such as this Discord server, and claiming otherwise is patently false. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 22:43, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Regardless of what RedRose64's concerns are, or how they phrased them, doesn't make them any less legitimate. Yes, there are opportunities for the community to meet and communicate off-wiki, and while during some of those opportunities people may discuss specific topics, that's not the same as having topic-specific venues where communication, and just as importantly, the history of said communication, is not recorded on-wiki. These sites and meet-ups might not lead to the creation of "cabals", but it can create the opportunity for "cabal-like" behavior. There is no harm is recognizing that some editors here may have concerns about that. - wolf23:13, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Regardless of what RedRose64's concerns are, or how they phrased them, doesn't make them any less legitimate. Yes, there are opportunities for the community to meet and communicate off-wiki, and while during some of those opportunities people may discuss specific topics, that's not the same as having topic-specific venues where communication, and just as importantly, the history of said communication, is not recorded on-wiki. These sites and meet-ups might not lead to the creation of "cabals", but it can create the opportunity for "cabal-like" behavior. There is no harm is recognizing that some editors here may have concerns about that. -
- By doing so, you are creating a cabal. Discussions about Wikipedia should be held on-wiki, if only for transparency. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:31, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
Help copy editing and reviewing content of my article please!
Hi everyone, my name is Amy and I'm writing my first ever Wikipedia article. It is classed as a stub in this WikiProject, and I believe I've expanded it well beyond that level. I would really appreciate some help with copy-editing but would love as well if you could just take a minute to read it as I've put a lot of effort in! I'm trying to bring the article beyond the stub category to a A, B, or C grade page. The page is about an extremist political group, the National Association for the Advancement of White People . Thanks for your help guys! — Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:Tofta22 (talk)|Tofta22 (talk)]] ([[User talk:Tofta22 (talk)#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Tofta22 (talk)|contribs]]) 11:05, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Ease of voting in each state
An editor has added rankings of the "easiest" and "hardest" states to vote in, to several US state articles. I question the value of this ranking, and have started a discussion at Talk:Texas#Ease of voting. Magnolia677 (talk) 12:30, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
ok. Quiet2 (talk) 07:31, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
Off-topic content at Talk:Social programs in the United States
I'm not sure if this is a good-faith edit, but in any case, it does not seem appropriate for Wikipedia. I'm not sure how to address it. Talk:Social programs in the United States#Children are in huge trouble. --Xarm Endris (talk) 10:12, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
History of Minnesota Featured article review
I have nominated
Notability of politicians
If a politician is one of two primary politicians for US Congress in 2022, who has had articles written about him with all large state papers in past elections, does that make this candidate notable?
What policy can I look up about this? Quiet2 (talk) 03:32, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
RfC on use of sources regarding "Founding Fathers"
I have posted an RfC on an editor's use of a source to declare 25+ colonial figures "Founding Fathers". To keep this neutral I won't say anything more except: Only a couple other editors have chimed in so far, and more opinions are needed to help resolve the dispute. My concern is I just discovered the changes a couple weeks ago, determined that they have stood since last October, and believe there's a possibility other sites on the internet may be echoing these claims.
The link to the RfC: Request for comment on use of sources. Any and all comments are most welcome. If this not the appropriate place for posting my request, please let me know and I will gladly delete it. Allreet (talk) 17:34, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
Drummer
Hello! While looking at my recent changes, I came across the
- Blaze Wolf, yes, it's poorly written/organized, though the subject is "clearly" notable based on his work. And if a COI is involved, "they" are not doing him many favors - Mr. Chamberlain seems to deserve better. Sources would help his cause greatly. I did a simple search on his name plus "drummer" and came up with dozens of relevant hits. The only question, then, is who's willing to do the work? If a reversion would help, why not, though it should be done with a cut and paste rather than an Undo so that other material since added is preserved. To let you know, I took a look and agree with your changes. One correction that needs to be made, and that I'll handle, is that he's no longer on tour with Dylan (who I just saw around the same time). Charley Drayton is now behind the drums, so says Rolling Stone, which happens to mention that Matt Chamberlain will be missed. BTW, thanks for your conscientiousness. Allreet (talk) 18:12, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Allreet: Alright sounds good. And you're very welcome. I often come across articles like these while looking through recent changes for vandalism and sometimes the edit that's being done isn't necessary vandalism but the article itself is just in bad shape. Also I had to look up what conscientiousness meant and as I said I greatly appreciate the compliment. I tend to be very strict with obeying rules― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 18:17, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
- I'm vaguely familiar with Matt Chamberlain from his work with Garbage, which is not at all covered apart from a 1 word mention that he has performed with the band. There's some relevant information on the articles for Garbage's albums, Chamberlain has performed drums for a number of Garbage songs, including 2 tracks on Not Your Kind of People and another 2 tracks on Beautiful Garbage, and has toured with the band. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 18:48, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Allreet: Alright sounds good. And you're very welcome. I often come across articles like these while looking through recent changes for vandalism and sometimes the edit that's being done isn't necessary vandalism but the article itself is just in bad shape. Also I had to look up what conscientiousness meant and as I said I greatly appreciate the compliment. I tend to be very strict with obeying rules― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 18:17, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
Please note...
the RfC here (with additional information here), and the related AfD here. Beyond My Ken (talk) 10:49, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
Revival of WikiProject Nebraska
Hello! I'm looking to attempt to revive WikiProject Nebraska. This is honestly the first time I've attempted something like this so I'm attempting to follow the directions listed at
- Linking the project here (Wikipedia:WikiProject Nebraska) for easy access. - Whisperjanes (talk) 15:49, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
FAR of Wesley Clark
I have nominated
FAR for Black Francis
I have nominated
Deletion of John McKeithen
It looks like the page on John McKeithen, governor of Louisiana from 1964-1972, has been deleted due to copyright concerns. Is there a standard list of sources for 20th-century US political history that can be drawn upon to recreate the page? If any section of the deleted article was verified to not be infringing on copyright, can that section be recovered? (Not sure if MER-C, who deleted the page, can help with this, if anyone with admin permissions can see the deleted text, or if the text is lost forever due to sensitivities of copyright.) I am happy to create a stub with basic information, but would like to check with others first. GlobeGores (talk page | user page) 08:49, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
- The primary contributor is Billy Hathorn so it's all bad. Create a stub and an admin can provide the references. MER-C 17:57, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
- Done.GlobeGores (talk page | user page) 21:42, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I need some help in this case. It's about data regarding the new 2020 Census. Thank you. Dionysos1988 (talk) 01:29, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
missing assessment
Could someone PLEASE assesss my 2017 article Des Moines Water Works as obviously I cant do it myself ? Thank you !--Wuerzele (talk) 22:51, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
- There's not actually any real prohibition on assessing articles you've created. After all, editors do not own articles they create. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 23:52, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
Notability of unorganized territories
A few months ago, the articles
I have nominated
FAR for J. R. Richard
I have nominated
Alpime Skiing World Cup race podiums
| Sport | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Country | USA | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Sport | Alpine skiing | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Medal record
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
At the end of each ski world cup competition, the first three athletes are awarded. Ok, no medals are awarded, but the placements in the top three are considered podiums in careers. Ok the "medal count" template speaks of "medals" and in the World Cup medals are not awarded to the first three as in the Olympics or the World Cup, but the count of podiums in the world cup would be useful information, as it is in other Wikipedia like the German one. Do not tell me that the infobox already contains the information of podiums and victories, because it does not contain the details. So I ask what harm it would be to put this additional information in the infobox since it is almost never in the body of the athletes article? See the esample of Mikaela Shiffrin. --Kasper2006 (talk) 17:47, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
US president timelines
I already posted this on Wikiproject History, but that page doesn't seem too active, so I'm posting it here too: The formatting of
- Many presidents don't have one at all. Who's up for writing one for William Henry Harrison? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:04, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
Discussion at Talk:Seymour, Indiana § Namechecking and not everything
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Seymour, Indiana § Namechecking and not everything. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:39, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- Would some members of this WikiProject mind taking a look at this. The article has recently been expanded quite a bit by a fairly new editor. I think this editor means well, but some of the recent additions seem to be moving too far into ) 23:40, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
Make Way for Ducklings FAR
I have nominated
Article about probably the most important historical record of the assassination of US President John F. Kennedy. Well, apparently I might be the only one who thinks so because this article is in terrible shape. It's fine if you don't believe me, if you're reading this post how about take a look at it - right now it's riddled with 12 citation needed templates - one dating from 2013 (Yeah...you read that right...a maintenance template has been sitting on this article for NINE YEARS), TEN dating from 2017, and one from 2022, it has an original research banner plastered at the top, 10 bare YouTube links as references, another section banner that dates from 2015... I might try hacking away at it a little and clearing away some of the editorial underbrush, but please jump in and let's get this article out of its present sorry state. Shearonink (talk) 05:14, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
- Yikes, terrible shape indeed. ---Another Believer (Talk) 05:31, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
- Hit & run tag rather than fixing ANYTHING themselves. So many tags and templates...and when I realized there was a tag on there from 2013!?! I am slightly swamped atm, but I think I can get at it by sometime Monday. If folks here and maybe yourself...if we can work together to improve it then maybe it won't be so overwhelming.
- The other thing is..I think whoever wrote all the unsupported text obviously was writing from a place of knowledge - I just wish they had included some
decentsources. Shearonink (talk) 14:55, 5 March 2022 (UTC)- Another Believer - Take a look at Zapruder film now, I think it's starting to look a little better. Shearonink (talk) 16:42, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
Discussion on LGBT representation in children's television
I started a split discussion on the LGBT representation in children's television article, located at [[Talk:LGBT representation in children's television#Talk:LGBT representation in children's television#Splitting proposal]], proposing that parts of the "LGBT representation on Disney Channel" section about Disney animation be split out into another article titled "Disney and LGBT representation in animation". --Historyday01 (talk) 02:46, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
why. is this about hte united states? Quiet2 (talk) 07:31, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
- Since most of the shows are U.S. shows... --Historyday01 (talk) 15:21, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
- I feel like this isnt relevant to the Project. It could be incorporated under the LGBTQ project (if one exists. I am not sure if one does) Sailorman722 (talk) 18:13, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
- Since most of the shows are U.S. shows... --Historyday01 (talk) 15:21, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Federal Aid Highway Act of 1956#Requested move 10 March 2022
GNIS
It would be great if articles were created with some references but specifically not with GNIS alone and certainly not sourced. This way we don't end up with an unsourced article like Abbie Joe, Louisiana. I live in the area and have not heard of it but I am researching. Thanks, --
- @Otr500: A frequent shortcoming of GNIS is that is sometimes misidentifies "locales" like ranches, crossings, crossroads, landings, railroad stops, and commercial establishments, as "populated places". It is best to have at least one other source to support notability as a populated place. As an aside, the editor who created that article is a notorious sockpuppet. Magnolia677 (talk) 10:27, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks, I saw that I didn't sign my post and was adding some info in case someone happened upon a source or two. -- The coords Place it on Louisiana Highway 12 (south side) between Ragley and DeQuincy, east of the old Temple-Inland Mill (Temple-Inland road) that was closed by Georgia Pacific and recently reopened by Interfor, and west of Clark road. There is evidence of what could have been a millpond. If I cannot find some sources I will nominate the article for AFD. -- Otr500 (talk) 10:41, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
- As for GNIS, I agree. I have seen hundreds of articles (many in California) that are only a spot on the map and no sources found. I try to find 3 or 4 sources and look at GNIS only to verify the coords. -- Thanks again for the quick reply, -- Otr500 (talk) 10:46, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:List of tenants in 1 World Trade Center#Requested move 17 March 2022
Natalie Clifford Barney Featured article review
I have nominated
FAR for USS Missouri
I have nominated
Requested move at Talk:Rutland (city), Vermont#Requested move 25 March 2022
Modern Whig Party
>There is a discussion at Talk:Modern Whig Party#Serious unresolved issues that may be of interest to some. -- Otr500 (talk) 15:01, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
United States Commission on International Religious Freedom
Please monitor United States Commission on International Religious Freedom. No content is present about it's reports but its totally filled with criticism about the reports. Content additions are largely political propaganda from the reported countries. Obey levy (talk) 14:10, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
RFC on Continental Association
There is a
New WikiProject
Hey everyone at WP United States, There is a new Wikiproject proposal for 20th Century Studios. (see Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/20th Century Studios) So if you are interested in joining please say so in the proposal, so we can see if there will be enough member to start a project. ― Kaleeb18TalkCaleb 20:20, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
New stub Everything's Gonna Be All White created
I've created a new stub called Everything's Gonna Be All White. I've added 9 references to the article and have added the infobox as well as the overview, cast, episodes and reception sections, but the article still needs some work like expanding and the episode list reformatted to the correct format. —Mythdon (talk • contribs) 19:34, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
2016 United States presidential election in North Carolina voter turnout % citation
Hi, I've found a resource in order to add a citation to the {{cn}} next to the voter turnout percentage, unfortunately it is a very large (11 gigabytes) file. I cannot open it (most likely due to my RAM only being 16gb), and I just want someone else to verify that the amount of registered voters at that snapshot is indeed somewhere around 6,873,824 people? For past registered voter datasheets if you open them in an editor such as Sublime Text (which I use), the columns bar on the side can tell you the amount of voters/data points, i.e. for the most recent snapshot it was around 8 million. I am asking if anyone here has a beefier computer which can open this file (downloadable from here, specficially VR_Snapshot_20161108.zip, unzips to a .txt file) & verify that the voter turnout was indeed, 68.89% which would be in line with the vote count of 4,741,564 (4,741,564 div 0.6889 = 6,873,824).X-750 I've made a mistake, haven't I? 06:01, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
User script to detect unreliable sources
I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to
- John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (
John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)
and turns it into something like
- John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.
It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.
The script is mostly based on
Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.
-
This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 May 3
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 May 3#Former constituencies, which is within the scope of this WikiProject. — DaxServer (t · m · c) 10:31, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
2022 abortion protests in the United States
Project members are invited to help expand the newly created
Article expansion and copy edit request
Greetings,
A new article Lettergate regarding international relations in between USA and Pakistan has been listed @ DyK, requesting further expansion and copy edit support.
Thanks, Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 11:31, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
FAR for Michigan State Capitol
I have nominated
ResolvedExtended content
|
|---|
 The article Panos Mourdoukoutas has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons .
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing |
If you are travelling this summer...
... and you like taking photos of things in Door County, see Wikipedia:Reward board#Add new Door County photos to articles.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 20:17, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
The Wire at FAR
I have nominated
- When you walk through the garden, you gotta watch your back. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:25, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
Should a page be created on this topic? There are a handful of sources for it like [1], [2] and [3]. Mhhossein talk 07:26, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
How patriotic are Americans
Hey I have scrolled through articles on American patriotism, American nationalism, and American Exceptionalism, and etc. But I haven’t seen any articles address how patriotic are Americans or how many Americans are patriotic despite the fact there are many surveys on this.
From [this,] [this,] [this,] [this,] [this,] and [this.]
I don’t Edit on this topic often so I didn’t want to touch this topic.CycoMa1 (talk) 23:56, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Hello! There has been a discussion at this talk page for a while now and I figured this might get better traction if posted here. The template at the moment makes estimations based on the 2010 census rather than the 2020 census, so it skews the population estimate percentages (e.g. look at United States#Population, where the 2021 estimate currently shows a 7.5% growth). I was wondering if someone who regularly watches this page could take a look at the matter. Part of the issue is that there are certainly several pages out there using this template that have not updated to the 2020 census, and I was wondering if this project had a way to see which template still needed updating. Thanks for your help! 12.42.50.52 (talk) 16:39, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
- Population nerds reading this page may be interested in the new Category:Pages using US Census population needing update, a new tracking category for articles about US places that need their census data updated. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:32, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
FAR for Grand Coulee Dam
I have nominated
Good Article reassessment
ResolvedSacred Cod has been nominated for a community 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. ɱ (talk) 05:10, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
- Update: Kept. ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:42, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
GAR for Spirit of the American Doughboy
ResolvedSpirit of the American Doughboy 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. Hog Farm Talk 13:59, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- Update: Delisted. ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:43, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Memorials to George Floyd
Please help expand the recently created Memorials to George Floyd. Thanks, ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:44, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
FAR for Anna May Wong
I have nominated
RfC on the end of the American Civil War
Please see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:American_Civil_War#RfC:_When_did_the_Civil_War_end? CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 18:42, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Overcounts and undercounts in censuses
It is well documented that probably all US censuses have had undercounts and overcounts. However, I would like to start a discussion about whether or not we should use figures adjusted based on estimates of overcount and undercount, and not the actual enumerated populations, when listing the populations of the US and its states in the event of statistically significant coverage errors (currently the Census Bureau does not provide this data for cities and counties; however, they did provide county level data for the 1990 census). No states had significant overcounts or undercounts in 2010; however, data released last month found that in 2020 eight states had significant overcounts and six had significant undercounts. For the overcounted states, this data was largely consistent with estimates. For example, the 2020 census enumerated about 800,000 more people in New York State than estimates released just months before had found. And sure enough, the results released last month confirmed that the estimates, and not the actual census, were indeed far more accurate. In terms of undercounted states, the consistency was mixed; some did indeed fall short of estimates, while others were almost exactly on par. The Census Bureau does seem to base its population estimates on the decennial enumerations, regardless of whether or not they are accurate, and the Supreme Court has ruled that only the enumerated population can be used for redistricting; however, other sources that estimate population, such as World Population Review, seem to take adjusted data into account. This begs the question, should we start using adjusted estimates, and not the actual enumerated population, when listing the populations of states by census, especially when there is strong evidence that the adjusted estimates are far more accurate? Bneu2013 (talk) 04:09, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
- The problem I have with this claim starts with the apparent dismissal of WP policy across all languages: each country's official demographic agency—the INSEE in France etc.—is the accepted source for each country's demographics: nation, states/provinces, municipalities. Thus, what World Population Review, Demographia, and other private demographers "seem to take into account" is irrelevant. That there are overcounts or undercounts from an official governmental agency of statistics must be expected. One, the undocumented migrant population is considerable in the U.S., UK, and most other wealthy nations, including continental Europe. Second, the desperately poor, the addicted, and the homeless are 21st-century phenomena in many places. This does impact urban areas especially (whether New York City or Luanda, it doesn't matter). However, any effort to remedy this, while obtaining wide consensus to impose some "corrected" figure over others, is another push toward "righting great wrongs" within the WP project. It opens a Pandora's box on sources and statistics. It promises no greater accuracy, just some editors' idea of "justice". Mason.Jones (talk) 15:40, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
- The estimates of undercount and overcount come from the Census Bureau, not third party sources that mostly regurgitate data from the Census Bureau. The 2020 census estimates I listed above that were inconsistent with the actual tabulation also came from the Census Bureau. What I am trying to raise here is, what should we do when the official agency responsible for determining the country's demographics claims that they were wrong? In the case of the recent census, there was additional data provided by the Census Bureau that suggested that their enumerations were wrong in some states. What really brought me here was multiple editors have insisted that Illinois's population figure be adjusted based on the estimate that the Census missed about 250k people there. I actually undid some edits there that changed the 2020 enumerated population. I don't know of any other instance where this has come up, but I thought it was something that likely needs discussion. Bneu2013 (talk) 07:47, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
- If a few editors from one state, Illinois, are disgruntled over their state's undercount, they can add—but not replace—a sentence about it right after the text mention of the official count. In the infobox and historical population, they can add—not replace—the figure with a short footnoted explanation. (If the edits you cited included a full ref, I would have restored the original figure but added theirs after it and why.) That said, proposing a WP policy shift across the board that replaces baseline, official U.S. census numbers is sheer POV, with a dash of righting great wrongs. It also jumps the gun on any future announcement by the U.S. Bureau that the Bureau will (formally) accept its new, adjusted numbers. After census and estimates are published, a handful of experienced WP editors do the huge task of updating U.S. Census stats (down to the municipal level). I shudder to think of the adjusted tables fraught with probable errors, miscopying, and fraud with your proposal as I imagine it. It is wrongheaded on so many levels. Mason.Jones (talk) 17:25, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
- If a few editors from one state, Illinois, are disgruntled over their state's undercount, they can add—but not replace—a sentence about it right after the text mention of the official count. In the infobox and historical population, they can add—not replace—the figure with a short footnoted explanation. (If the edits you cited included a full ref, I would have restored the original figure but added theirs after it and why.) That said, proposing a WP policy shift across the board that replaces baseline, official U.S. census numbers is sheer POV, with a dash of
- The estimates of undercount and overcount come from the Census Bureau, not third party sources that mostly regurgitate data from the Census Bureau. The 2020 census estimates I listed above that were inconsistent with the actual tabulation also came from the Census Bureau. What I am trying to raise here is, what should we do when the official agency responsible for determining the country's demographics claims that they were wrong? In the case of the recent census, there was additional data provided by the Census Bureau that suggested that their enumerations were wrong in some states. What really brought me here was multiple editors have insisted that Illinois's population figure be adjusted based on the estimate that the Census missed about 250k people there. I actually undid some edits there that changed the 2020 enumerated population. I don't know of any other instance where this has come up, but I thought it was something that likely needs discussion. Bneu2013 (talk) 07:47, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
- The problem I have with this claim starts with the apparent dismissal of WP policy across all languages: each country's official demographic agency—the
FAR for Hurricane Irene
I have nominated
One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!
 Hello, |
Beauregard-Keyes House listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Beauregard-Keyes House to be moved to BK Historic House and Gardens. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 01:10, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
Wikipedia:WikiProject RuPaul's Drag Race listed at Requested moves
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
Killing of XXXTentacion listed at Requested moves
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
Requested move at Talk:Auditor of North Carolina#Requested move 6 August 2022
FAR for School for Creative and Performing Arts
I have nominated
Providence
Hello there, WikiProject United States. I’ve came here to tell you that there’s a High-Importance Article of need. Providence, Rhode Island. Providence has sections that need updating,[citation needed] is scattered across the article..I think we need to fix up the page or send it to the Wikipedia:Featured article review. Danubeball (talk) 03:05, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
Draft article for Ion District
Hello! I'm Katrina, here on behalf of the Ion to suggest some improvements to the
There are many problems with the current Wikipedia article. The text relies heavily on press releases, company websites, government documents, and Rice University's student newspaper over secondary journalistic sources. The article also seems skewed, focusing on the community benefits agreement and funding more than the campus and facilities. There is also some incorrect text and outdated information. For these reasons, I've worked to draft a much improved article, which I've saved here for editors to review: User:KB Ion/Ion District.
My first request to replace the "Campus" section with the proposed "Description" section was fulfilled, but I'm struggling to get feedback on my proposed replacement for the History section. Are any WikiProject United States participants willing to review what I've proposed and copy over the content appropriately? Thanks! KB Ion (talk) 16:10, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
Criminal sentencing in the United States needs a lot of work
See
) 06:06, 25 July 2022 (UTC)3rd Battalion, 3rd Marines Featured article review
I have nominated
Review request for Tudor Dixon, 2022 Michigan governor candidate
Hello, can someone be so kind as to review
Drafts for senate candidates
I'm working on drafts for
06:29, 4 August 2022 (UTC)1912 United States cold wave listed at Requested moves
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
Texas A&M Health Science Center College of Medicine listed at Requested moves
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
Asian Americans (documentary series) listed at Requested moves
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
February 2015 North American cold wave listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for February 2015 North American cold wave to be moved to February 2015 Eastern North America cold wave. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 04:03, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
Assistance at Bill Ackman article
Hello! Francis here, representing Pershing Square Capital Management. I've created an account to suggest some article improvements, starting with the article about investor Bill Ackman. Given my conflict of interest, I'll be proposing improvements on the discussion page instead of editing directly. I've submitted requests to remove duplicate text, correct the Personal life section, and removal unnecessary detail. These have been in the edit request queue for a while, if any WikiProject U.S. members are able to take a look. Thank you! FMatPSCM (talk) 18:54, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
Featured Article Review: Andrew Jackson
I have nominated
Stephanie Cutter
Hi editors, I'm Christian and I work for Precision Strategies. I've been hoping to make some updates to the Stephanie Cutter article and have made a few requests at the article Talk page that I think help organize the article a bit better and clean up some redundancy, but I've been unsuccessful so far in getting those requests reviewed. I've been trying WikiProjects and users with no luck so far. I'd love it if someone here could help me out! I won't make any edits myself due to my conflict of interest. Thanks in advance for your consideration! PrecisionChristian (talk) 19:31, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
FAR for Hillary Clinton
RFC
July–August 2022 United States floods has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. --LordPeterII (talk) 12:12, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Request for HubSpot
Hello! On behalf of HubSpot, I've submitted a request to update the Software and services section. I've proposed specific text additions based on Wikipedia-appropriate sources about some of the company's major products, similar to what's already said about HubSpot CRM Free. I've disclosed my conflict of interest and included Template:Request edit, but so far the request has gone unanswered. Might a member of WikiProject U.S. be willing to take a look and update the article appropriately? Thanks for your consideration. Inkian Jason (talk) 14:01, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
FAR for Swedish emigration to the United States
GAR for Walter Hunt (inventor)
Walter Hunt (inventor) has been nominated for a community 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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 04:41, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
American Caesar
Hello. I have proposed adding a new section to the Monarchism article on the talk page there. I was wondering if editors reading this can stop by and give me your opinions on this proposal. I have provided links to some sources. I am guessing I might need better sources. Here is a link to that discussion: [4]. Thanks in advance. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 02:51, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
FAR for Providence, Rhode Island
Requested move at Talk:Epik (company)#Requested move 6 September 2022
Requested move at Talk:Lincoln Park, Denver#Requested move 9 September 2022
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Lincoln Park, Denver#Requested move 9 September 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – robertsky (talk) 13:57, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Profit-sharing pension plan#Requested move 17 September 2022
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Profit-sharing pension plan#Requested move 17 September 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 13:54, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!
Hello, |
FAR for Emperor Norton
I have nominated
Featured article review for ironclad warship
News organization rankings of states
Perhaps there has already been a discussion and consensus on this topic. Otherwise, please look at Talk:Vermont#CNBC rating of states to help develop a consensus on this topic. Sincerely, HopsonRoad (talk) 23:21, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
Requested move discussion at Talk:NAACP Lawsuit Against Donald J. Trump, Rudolph Giuliani, the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers#Requested move 30 September 2022
There is an requested move pending at
Requested move at Talk:Wild Turkey#Requested move 28 September 2022
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Wild Turkey#Requested move 28 September 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 02:14, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
Creation of "Child Poverty in the United States"
Hi, I am creating an article on Child Poverty in the United States. This is a very relevant and impactful topic that is not represented on Wikipedia yet. My ideas and references for this article are posted on sandboxes found on my user page. --Mmemorablemoments (talk) 17:47, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
Request for comment regarding Tudor Dixon
There is a
FAR for Tyrone Garland
Requested move at Talk:Taps#Requested move 30 October 2022
FAR for New Carissa
Requested move at Talk:Signal Corps (United States Army)#Requested move 9 November 2022
Settlements destroyed in Civil War
A while back I created Category:Settlements destroyed during the American Civil War. Please add to articles that were missed as you feel appropriate. Thanks! Magnolia677 (talk) 11:16, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Wilmington insurrection of 1898
Featured list removal candidate notification
I have nominated
FAR for Benjamin Franklin Tilley
I have nominated
March 18, 1817 Letter found from one Atty: Edwin A. White to his Father Moses White Esquire
I have found an antique letter dated March 18, 1817 from an Atty:in Columbia University to his Father in Coo's County, New Hampshire of Lancaster City. The letter is about 4 pages long and gives advice to his Dad about to more brothers as John and Charley White. Hoping they will be the new "good farmers" of their Fathers' land. I would like to donate this letter to a Historical Foundation or something similar, but, am completely ignorant to this matter. Please advise. 2603:9001:1001:CD6E:88B3:146:EE09:320A (talk) 21:19, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
Updates to 2020 Postal Voting in U.S. Article
Hey there! I'm a U.S. Postal Service employee looking for help improving the Postal voting in the 2020 United States elections article. On that article's Talk page, it says that it's "of interest" to this WikiProject, so I thought this might be a good forum to ask for help.
I recently proposed a redraft of the article's Postal service crisis section, which appears not to have been updated much since 2020, when it was describing ongoing events. I rewrote a handful of sentences so that they're now in past tense, cleaned up a few citation templates, and added some information on how the Postal Service eventually performed in the 2020 election. You can read my full edit request on the Postal Voting in 2020 Talk page, and the section draft is accessible on my user page.
As a USPS employee, I know that I can't edit agency-related pages directly, and that I should rely on independent editors to evaluate the merits of any suggestions I make. I would deeply appreciate it if someone from this WikiProject could review my section draft, let me know if it's up to snuff or needs improvement. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 02:54, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Fox Sports 1#Requested move 15 December 2022
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Fox Sports 1#Requested move 15 December 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – robertsky (talk) 13:03, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
AFD on list of proposed national monuments
Please consider participating in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of proposed national monuments of the United States. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 22:50, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
GAR notice
Zachary Taylor has been nominated for a community 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. Onegreatjoke (talk) 20:08, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
GA Reassessment
University of Houston has been nominated for a community 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) 00:28, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Hurricane Gloria under FA Review
I have nominated
Requested move at Talk:2020–2023 United States racial unrest#Requested move 3 January 2023
GAR for Nastia Liukin
Nastia Liukin has been nominated for a community 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. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:22, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
Issue One request
Hi there, WikiProject United States members. I work with Issue One, a U.S.-based nonprofit organization. I have posted a request to the Issue One Talk page that outlines a proposed update to the article's History section. I suggest retitling the section as "Formation" and simplifying some of the details about the Issue One predecessor organizations.
Because of my conflict of interest, I will avoid implementing these edits myself. Instead, my hope is that I can get an experienced editor to review what I've put together and then make the changes if they seem like improvements. Any help or feedback you can provide would be appreciated! AR at Issue One (talk) 21:07, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- Posting here just to bump this post. I've yet to receive any responses to my Talk page request about the History section. I'm hoping an experienced editor can provide some feedback or at least point me in the right direction for further assistance. Thank you! AR at Issue One (talk) 15:40, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Appomattox Court House National Historical Park
Appomattox Court House National Historical Park 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 02:09, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Cuisine of the Thirteen Colonies
Cuisine of the Thirteen Colonies 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. Onegreatjoke (talk) 16:34, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Great Storm of 1975
Great Storm of 1975 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. Onegreatjoke (talk) 00:05, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
Category:China-US Cold War has been nominated for discussion
Category:China-US Cold War 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. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 14:56, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Sanctus Real
Sanctus Real 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 02:18, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Jessica Hardy
Jessica Hardy 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. Onegreatjoke (talk) 01:10, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Update National Parks visitation template
Can we update {{NPS visitation}} so that it will link to a single report, rather than a page full of reports? I think it's best to link to "Annual Visitation By Park (1979 - Last Calendar Year)", but others may think a different report is better. —Lights and freedom (talk ~ contribs) 02:02, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
Listing Americans by ethnicity and occupation
Several more intersection categories of American people are probably going to be deleted at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2022_December_19#American_people_of_European_descent_by_occupation. Please feel free to make lists where useful, or request a list from a particular category at the end of that CFD discussion if you would like me to do so. – Fayenatic London 13:16, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
A discussion at Talk:Phoenix, Arizona#Requested move 1 February 2023 may be of interest. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 16:54, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
Should the "Wi Spa controversy" Article Identify the Suspect by Name?
Please consider contributing to the "Should the Article Name the Suspect?" discussion at Talk:Wi Spa controversy. --Mox La Push (talk) 06:00, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
Featured article review for Yellowstone
I have nominated
FAR for Panic of 1907
Project-independent quality assessments
See Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Project-independent quality assessments. This proposes support for quality assessment at the article level, recorded in {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and inherited by the wikiproject banners. However, wikiprojects that prefer to use custom approaches to quality assessment can continue to do so. Aymatth2 (talk) 20:47, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Albany, New York
Rocket Lab
There is an open request for comment at Talk:Rocket Lab regarding how to describe the nationality of the company. As a publicly traded American company, headquartered in California, representation by Americans would be appreciated. Grey Wanderer (talk) 00:44, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Economy of Ohio
Economy of Ohio 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. Onegreatjoke (talk) 20:01, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
The article Robert Wiedemer has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Has failed
WP:RSP.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 14:17, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!
Hello, |
FAR for United States Academic Decathon
I have nominated
A new category for grouping tracking categories automatically added by templates related to the United States. Feel free to add its subcategories to your watchlist and to add other related template tracking categories to it. —andrybak (talk) 22:58, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
Publicising RM: Iraqi conflict (2003–present) → Iraqi conflict (2003–2017)
Please see here:
) 15:19, 6 March 2023 (UTC)RFC on general & party elections
An RFC on the intros of general & party elections is being held. GoodDay (talk) 16:30, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
"Nth Hardest-state to vote in" in state articles
It looks like a reference to "Cost of Voting in the American States: 2020" was added to every state article. I have removed it from half-a-dozen of them, and at least one of those removals was reverted. (Note Special:Diff/1146264414 as an example.)
The main rationale: this is a primary source. Without interpretation or context, saying "Arizona was ranked as the 21st-hardest state for citizens to vote in" is fairly meaningless. But, we cannot interpret the primary source.
Also, this is too detailed and irrelevant for a top-level article on a state; the information is also in
- See [5] where this was discussed before. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 16:43, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
- It looks like the prior discussion leaned in favor of including it, when worded appropriately. Its from a reliable source, so I don't see any reason to doubt it. It is a useful statistic. Also, it is in no way a primary source. Its a scholarly paper in an academic journal. That is the bread and butter of Wikipedia. A primary source would be raw data that underlied their research, or the musings of politicians. But this source has analysis, reflection, and citation which makes them a secondary source. I'm not seeing why we shouldn't include it. I agree it shouldn't be in the lead. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 18:43, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
How far back to go for Demographics?
Hello all, just curious as to how far back the demographics of a place should go? My initial assumption was an article should only contain the most recent census but I've seen some articles that post previous decade's census. I also tried looking through the MoS and other resources but couldn't find an answer.
To be more exact, I am wondering if entire data from the 2010 and 2000 censuses' are helpful in an article. Two examples I found were
Good article reassessment for Great Raid of 1840
Great Raid of 1840 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 20:14, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
First ladies of the United States
I've created a page at User:Thebiguglyalien/First ladies of the United States to track the progress of the U.S. first lady articles, with the goal of getting them all to good article status. I encourage anyone interested in this to look at it and see if there are any articles they'd consider improving. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 20:47, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
Wisconsin - an authoritarian enclave
A content dispute at Wisconsin the would benefit from the input of editors experienced with US politics. A recent edit describes the Badger State as an "authoritarian enclave" and "democracy desert", with "free but not fair" elections. There is a discussion at Talk:Wisconsin#Status as an authoritarian enclave. --Magnolia677 (talk) 16:00, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Lowell mill girls
Lowell mill girls 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. Onegreatjoke (talk) 03:30, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
FAR For USS Wisconsin
I have nominated
Project-independent quality assessments
Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.
No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.
However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 22:11, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
FAR for Bernard Williams
Good article reassessment for Flag of Indiana
Flag of Indiana 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. Onegreatjoke (talk) 17:07, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Red Auerbach
Red Auerbach 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. Onegreatjoke (talk) 21:20, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
Discussion of interest
This discussion may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:40, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:B. J. Pak#Requested move 10 April 2023
Good article reassessment for Gene Robinson
Gene Robinson 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. Onegreatjoke (talk) 19:46, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Newport News, Virginia
Newport News, Virginia 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. Onegreatjoke (talk) 19:54, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Jonathan Stone#Requested move 21 April 2023
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Jonathan Stone#Requested move 21 April 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. UtherSRG (talk) 12:43, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
Afghanistan conflict (1978–present) move discussion
Please see here for more details:
Seeking review on Louis DeJoy section draft
Hey there! I recently placed an edit request on the Talk page for U.S. postmaster general Louis DeJoy that I think editors at this WikiProject might be interested in. My request proposes an updated version of the article's Postmaster general section, which covers DeJoy's tenure at the Postal Service. My main goals in revising the section were to: 1.) add new information drawn from news coverage that has been published over the past few years, and 2.) solidify existing content by clarifying facts and/or adding new sourcing.
I'm a USPS employee, which is why I'm using the edit request system. I know that my COI means I have to make suggestions and then defer to the judgment of independent editors. If you would like to view my edit request, which details all the specific changes made within my section draft, please follow this link. My draft is available within a subsection of my user page. You'll notice there are highlighted passages. That's so it's easier to identify which parts of the existing section I added to or altered. Brand new language that I have added is highlighted in green, and language that I have adjusted in order to make it more accurate is highlighted in blue.
I know I'm asking a lot of editors with this request, so I'm fine with discussing this draft piece-by-piece. But I figured I would put the whole thing forward and let individual editors decide if they want to tackle certain parts or the whole thing at once. I'm totally open to feedback. Please don't hesitate to reach out with questions or comments. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 18:55, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- Hello! I'm back to let editors at this WikiProject know that I have closed my full section draft edit request and have started to break out my proposed changes in batches. One editor has already helped me immensely by reviewing my first several changes, and now I've got a part two up on the Louis DeJoy Talk page. If you follow this link, you will see that I've built a table that compares the current text of the section against the revisions and/or additions I put forward in my draft. My hope is that this will make the review process relatively easy on anybody who's interested in trying to improve the Louis DeJoy article.
- Any help I could get with this request would be very much appreciated. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 18:47, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:PNC Plaza#undefined
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:PNC Plaza#undefined that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. SkyWarrior 22:07, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
Discussion on whether or not to include being CEO, host, author, etc under Candidate Experience
I've started a discussion regarding this at Talk:2024 Democratic Party presidential primaries, which has more troublesome entries. Aaron Liu (talk) 15:30, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
FAR for The Log from the Sea of Cortez
Merger discussion for Deen the Great vs. Walid Sharks
Unreferenced BLPs
There are currently over 2,000 BLPs that have no references. Due to the large number of U.S. biographies, about a quarter of them are about Americans. Sourcing in BLP articles is a high priority issue, and any help adding citations is appreciated. A full list of unreferenced U.S. BLPs can be found here. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:21, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
Establishing consensus on abortion in U.S. state articles
This is a massively complicated RFC that can't be distilled into a simple "yes" or no question. So I'm breaking it down into five main questions.
- Should the subject of abortion ever be mentioned in any state article's political section? (Outside of historical information surrounding abortion.)
- If #1 is "yes", should information about state's abortion laws be included in every state's body? (Provided that the information from WP: RSon present law is available, verifiable, and clear.)
- Should U.S. states that are exceptional in abortion law have that mentioned in their respective leads? (Either through the criteria I suggested or an alternative method.)
- If #3 is "yes", is the criteria I proposed for #3 to determine what is "exceptional" in the "my proposal" section reasonable and should be used as policy going forward?
- (Optional) Is there any other suggestions/et al. that you want to add?
KlayCax (talk) 03:06, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
While
There are several ways to arguably tackle this problem. Since I don't think many people commenting (at least not enough to get a consensus or anywhere near a majority) will hold the position that:
- Abortion should not be mentioned in every possible state's body. (An obvious absurdity)
- Abortion should be prominently displaced in every state's lead. (Another obvious absurdity)
I think a solution that would probably find wide agreement would be based upon this criteria:
- The state's laws on abortion are exceptional. They have very little parallels among Western countries, liberal democracies — or even internationally — at all.
- Or the state's abortion laws played a key role in its history. (In theory/in case it does become historically important)
Judging by
- Have no exceptions for rape, likely incest, along with arguably fetal impairment. (The red, the orange, and arguably the pink and brown here.)
- This would also include "saving the life of the mother" if a state passed a hypothetical ban on this. Presently, no state does.
- Have no gestational limits at all. (Canada comes the closest. Yet they de facto often refuse to perform abortions after 23 weeks and 6 days. Several states have what appears to be the loosest abortion laws in the world. That certainly seems notable.)
- In contrast, several U.S. states have stricter abortion laws than any area of the Western world — and countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, and Egypt. To me, laws with a greater restriction that that obviously seem to warrant inclusion.
My proposal
This seems to me a reasonable proposal:
- State's laws on abortion are mentioned in every article's body but not lead. (Unless the below)
- State's laws on abortion are only mentioned in the lead of a state's article if:
- It is legal at all stages of pregnancy. (Alaska, Colorado, New Mexico, Oregon, New Jersey, Vermont) Almost no jurisdiction in the world has laws similar to this.
- There are total or near-total bans with no exceptions for rape, incest, et al. (Wisconsin, South Dakota, Missisippi, Arkansas.) Laws that are similarly almost unparalleled throughout the Western World/liberal democracies.
- Precendent setting (If a future case hypothetically results in major and overwhelming change to law — such as a nationwide change à la Dobbs v. Jackson or Roe v. Wade.)
Essentially, just the red, light blue, and orange on the chart, along with arguably the pink and brown.
Looking forward to a consensus being reached! KlayCax (talk) 03:06, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose 3 & 4: I think you lay the case out exceptionally well, but I draw a different conclusion. Abortion law and its governance on the local level in the US is an exceptional circumstance with regard to Western nations. However, the individual restrictions or permissions are not exceptional. Take the cases of WP:UNDUE. I think that each state's abortion law should be afforded due body mentions in this new post-Dobbs context, but unless we're talking about a major societal shift in a state hinging largely on abortion laws going either way (and not just in a RECENTISM-leaning way), there's no real reason for mention in the leads. ~ Pbritti (talk) 03:37, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
- Neither Luxembourg or Lichenstein
"restrict abortion in the same way some of the most restrictive states do in the US"
Luxembourg allows abortion up to 12 weeks. Liechtenstein, from what I can tell, allows abortion in the case of rape. If they were hypothetical states, neither of them would have it mentioned in their leads under the criteria proposed. It is also, as you said, an apples-to-oranges comparison. Detailed policy is almost never described in a country's leads beyond its fundamental government structure. (For example: Canada's FA-article — as good of a metric as any for what an country's article should look like — merely describes the fact that it is a " parliamentary liberal democracy and a constitutional monarchy in the Westminster tradition".) In contrast, the leads of states often denote their individualized policies, culture, and political-leanings. (Whether it's Vermont, South Dakota, New Hampshire, West Virginia, New York, et al.) Washington's present article already mentions abortion in its lead. the individual restrictions or permissions are not exceptional
Why do you say that? As mentioned above: several states are clearly exceptional (in an international sense) on both metrics. The scope of states relaxation and restrictions on abortion - depending on the state - is internationally exceptional. The United States has among the most relaxed (the most?) de facto/jure abortion laws in the world (Within certain states.) and the most strict of any Western country or liberal democracy. (Within certain states.)- A single sentence in the lead is entirely ) 06:46, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
- Neither Luxembourg or Lichenstein
- Support 1, 2, and 5: based on notability: I agree that abortion laws are a significant enough part of a state's legal code now that they should always be mentioned in the body. However, for whether a state's laws should be mentioned in the lead I don't think whether they're exceptional should really be our criteria. Indeed, like most things on Wikipedia, I don't think that we should really even leave the decision up to us: we should include abortion laws in the lead when they're a significant part of the state's coverage in reliable sources, including especially nation-wide and international news sources. Unlike Pbritti, I think there are probably states that clear this burden: so for instance, googling "abortion" right at this moment without even mentioning a specific state gets me three national sources about a recent Idaho law, which I think is significant enough to justify mentioning this law in the article on Idaho (especially if coverage is sustained for a bit after it passes). Loki (talk) 04:49, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
- I think it’s perfectly alright to include abortion now that they can be widely different based on states. but I don’t feel so okay establishing a set of criteria as we haven’t had many cases to study. It’s simply too early and most of the discussion are just going to be based on hypotheticals at best. MarvelousPeach (talk) 12:14, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose - I'm wary of prescribing anything here. There's an old wiki (and encyclopedia) debate about what sorts of information should be considered standard within a set of articles vs. how much we should try to weigh aspects of the subjects based on available sourcing. I tend to err on the side of the latter. Odds are quite good that any summary of laws in a state should mention abortion not because of something inherent to the subject but because it's an area of the law that tends to get a whole lot of coverage. The lead is trickier. States have a long history, and I think it will be the exception, rather than the rule, where it makes sense to always include a certain type of law. Perhaps it makes sense for some states to include an overview of that state in the 21st century, and in that context abortion may come up? But again, I don't think this is something we can prescribe (or proscribe). — Rhododendrites talk \\ 13:02, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose, this is an overbearing prescription to apply to the various state articles. Abortion is clearly a huge and notable political/legal issue in many US states, so it's probably going to end up in many article bodies in some form or another. However, that is due to the individual relevance for each particular state. That is just the body. The lead is even further from consideration. I suspect for many states it might not even merit a mention, for those where it does it would likely be limited to "elections have been significantly influenced by debates over, X, Y, abortion, Z, etc". ) 05:55, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose as excessive bureaucracy. This should be decided on a case by case basis for each state article, not prescribed as a rule. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 14:18, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose, as it should be decided on a state by state basis using the weight sources assign to the importance of abortion in the state. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:45, 19 April 2023 (UTC) (Summoned by bot)
- Support 2 because it's an important topic. —Lights and freedom (talk ~ contribs) 17:01, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose (which is effectively the same as "option 1") - this is an effort to over-emphasize a contemporary political debate. Certainly there are some states where this should be in the "politics" section. But I doubt it needs to be in the lead of any state's article at this time. Walt Yoder (talk) 17:06, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose I agree with much of the oppose arguments. Changes to those state articles should be discussed at those state articles. Nemov (talk) 17:28, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
For quality reviews in Transnational authoritarianism
Sorry for leaving the messages for discuss issues on Transnational authoritarianism about
The party in the case is well known in zhwiki communities for long of violatimg rules and acting like Wolf warrior,that keep on ideological battles and conflicts for no end with anyone against it. Those matters could be comfirmed by other memmbers in zhwiki communities if they could well defend the complicated annoying and unwanted contacts, attacks, intimidation from this user.
And in the case,it keep on editing with the idea of US repression on Edward Snowden AND Julian Assange，insisting the topic should be in name of repression and without authoritarian states, and would not satisfy only if there wouldn't be writting arguments agaist the authoritarian states
I would be ok for local professional memmbers to assist the topics,but as I have reported locally,the pattern of the user could make anyone involing the processes suffer,I suggest the parties of communties should holding enough strong mental powers for the matters. Longway22 (talk) 10:18, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Locations in the United States with an English name#Requested move 7 May 2023
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Locations in the United States with an English name#Requested move 7 May 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. EggRoll97 (talk) 18:17, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
Seeking editor input on United States Postal Service edit requests
Hello! I'm a United States Postal Service employee working as a COI editor to suggest improvements to the agency's article. I currently have two open edit requests on the USPS Talk page, the first of which proposes updates to the article's During the Trump administration section and the second of which does the same for the Coronavirus pandemic and voting by mail one. My goal with these requests is to clarify descriptions of certain recent events in the agency's history and, where possible, to add new information that's been reported by reputable press outlets.
This WikiProject is listed on the USPS Talk page, so I thought it might be a good forum in which to find interested non-COI editors. If anyone here has the time and inclination, I would appreciate a thorough review of my proposed changes. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 16:42, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
FAR for David Lovering
FAR for David Lovering
One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!
Hello, |
Requested move at Talk:Sea Turtle, Inc.#Requested move 1 June 2023
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Sea Turtle, Inc.#Requested move 1 June 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. UtherSRG (talk) 10:48, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Matt Hardy
Matt Hardy 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. Onegreatjoke (talk) 19:48, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:KLUV#Requested move 28 June 2023
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:KLUV#Requested move 28 June 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. UtherSRG (talk) 12:20, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Nicky Hilton Rothschild#Requested move 23 June 2023
Requested move at Talk:Crunchyroll LLC#Requested move 2 July 2023
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Crunchyroll LLC#Requested move 2 July 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. UtherSRG (talk) 11:03, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
Change a title
I was proposing to change the name of
CFM International CFM56 at FAR
I have nominated
2020 Census demographics question
I'm going to update some city and county articles with the 2020 census demographics. For the race and ethnicity, I'm wondering which is preferred:
- List the percentage of non-Hispanics/Latinos of each race (White, Black, Asian, Native American, Pacific Islander, Other, Two or more races), and then group all Hispanics/Latinos together
- List the percentage of each race (including Hispanics/Latinos): White, Black, Asian, Native American, Pacific Islander, Other, Two or more races; also list the total percentage of Hispanics/Latinos.
- Either of the above options, but for each racial group, include people who are that race and another race (so people who are White and Black would be included in both the White and Black percentages).
For example, look at Fremont, California#Race_and_ethnicity.
There is SO MUCH census information that it would be excessive to include it all in the article (as an example, we could list the number of people in a city that are Hispanic/Latino and both Asian and some other race). So what is the best way to present this? —Lights and freedom (talk ~ contribs) 23:56, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
Resolute desk peer review requested
I am lookign for a review of the article Resolute desk before i put it up for FAC. Please feel free to take a look if you have time. The review can be found HERE. Found5dollar (talk) 22:38, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
Most common name for Governor and Senator Brewster of Maine
Please review the sources and comment here regarding the name to be used by Ralph Owen Brewster.--User:Namiba 13:40, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
There is a content dispute about whether the name of the article Biden–Ukraine conspiracy theory be changed in response to recent non-conspiratorial allegations against Biden. The input of others at Talk:Biden–Ukraine conspiracy theory#Not all content is "conspiracy theory"; title and content need changing would be appreciated. Magnolia677 (talk) 20:22, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
RM Re: October surprise conspiracy theory
There is currently
Discussion at Wikipedia:Content assessment
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Content assessment#Proposal: Reclassification of Current & Future-Classes as time parameter, which is within the scope of this WikiProject. This WikiProject received this message because it currently uses "Current" and/or "Future" class(es). There is a proposal to split these two article "classes" into a new parameter "time", in order to standardise article-rating across Wikipedia (per RfC), while also allowing simultaneous usage of quality criteria and time for interest projects. Thanks! —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 07:14, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
JFK Assassination Featured Article Candidacy
If anyone is interested, the Assassination of John F. Kennedy has been nominated for Featured Article promotion. Any comments would be appreciated. Thanks, ~ HAL333 18:35, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
Gene King country musician
Please see question posted at Winnsboro, Louisiana#Status of Gene King, country music singer and band leader?. (This mention would no doubt be better posted at an active WikiProject Louisiana, but that WikiProject was long ago hijacked by WikiProject United States's banner directing readers to here instead.) --Doncram (talk,contribs) 00:09, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Robbins Airport (Illinois)#Requested move 10 July 2023
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Robbins Airport (Illinois)#Requested move 10 July 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 09:10, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
Requesting some copy edit help
Hi, I am user Bookku usually work in information and knowledge gap areas. Just worked on sandbox draft '
Another discussion at Talk:Second Cold War
The matter of the {{globalize}} tag in the Second Cold War article is discussed. More inputs are welcome there. Link: Talk:Second Cold War#Remove "globalize" tag? George Ho (talk) 22:49, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
The population and census info seems wrong at Clearfield, Utah; can anyone verify it? Kk.urban (talk) 20:17, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- [6] AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:22, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- So that population is different from what the articles says according to the 2020 census. The demographics section of the article includes number of households, pop density, land area, education figures, home vacancy rate, and median income. I'm not totally sure if these are supposed to be from the 2020 census or some American Community Survey estimates. Kk.urban (talk) 20:38, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- No article should contain unsourced demographic data. I'd revise it to whatever the 2020 census says, and remove entirely anything you have no source for, then add an citation to the census. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:47, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- So that population is different from what the articles says according to the 2020 census. The demographics section of the article includes number of households, pop density, land area, education figures, home vacancy rate, and median income. I'm not totally sure if these are supposed to be from the 2020 census or some American Community Survey estimates. Kk.urban (talk) 20:38, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
Areas keep changing
Does anyone know why the areas of counties keep changing between different years in the US Census gazeteers? I'm talking about things like this list of counties in Nevada. They release a new table every year and the areas have often changed significantly from Wikipedia's lists of counties. Are these the most reliable and if so, which year should we use? Kk.urban (talk) 05:21, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
Seeking input on Louis DeJoy GOP Fundraising section
Hello! I'm checking in on this WikiProject to see if anyone here would be interested in examining some edits I've suggested to US Postmaster General Louis DeJoy's article. I'm trying to clean up a couple passages and add some fresh context to the section that covers his time as a fundraiser for the Republican Party.
I'm a USPS employee with a conflict of interest, so I can't make these edits myself. I'm looking for interested independent editors who can weigh the substance of my proposed changes and either post them to the article or make alternative suggestions. Since WP United States is listed on the Louis DeJoy Talk page, I thought this would be a good place to look. Here's a link to my suggested edits. Feel free to engage me here or on the DeJoy Talk page. I'll happily answer any questions you may have. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 11:12, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
Lists of Americans is weird
I'm an American. There is no place for me, if I were notable, in the section By ethnicity or place of origin. And how far can your ancestors be to make you a hybrid American? Doug Weller talk 09:06, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
Credibility bot
As this is a highly active WikiProject, I would like to introduce you to
) 18:09, 5 August 2023 (UTC)Missing article on major topic
Wikipedia does not have an article on
Some "find source" links:
- general – Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
- history – Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
- judiciary – Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
- procedure – Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 02:28, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- @Mathglot: I notice that the article Criminal justice might not reflect a world-wide view of the subject. It seems to include a lot of US specific information and could be a starting point for this topic. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 06:34, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Osteopathic medicine in the United States
Osteopathic medicine in the United States 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) 15:56, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Tax protester constitutional arguments
Tax protester constitutional arguments 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) 10:50, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Undo hijacking of WikiProjects Louisiana and New Orleans
Long ago the WikiProject Louisiana talk page banner AND the WikiProject New Orleans talk page banner were both hijacked, so readers are directed to post here at WikiProject United States instead. This undermines development, discussion of Louisiana and NOLA community matters. Therefore I propose/request cessation of hijacking by eliminating the automatic conversion of talk page banners {{
) 01:24, 7 July 2023 (UTC)- Pinging User:Totnesmartin
- Aaron charles (talk · contribs)
- AlphaEta (talk · contribs)
- Antley (talk · contribs)
- AquaTeen13 (talk · contribs)
- ArkansasTraveler (talk · contribs)
- talk · contribs)
- Avazina (talk · contribs)
- Bhockey10 (talk · contribs)
- Blackwarrior (talk · contribs)
- Braxtonianman (talk · contribs)
- btilm (talk · contribs)
- Bwash88 (talk · contribs)
- CarbonX (talk · contribs)
- Chetblong (talk · contribs)
- DavidDelaune (talk · contribs)
- Dthomsen8 (talk · contribs)
- DudeWithAFeud (talk · contribs)
- Frank042316 (talk · contribs)
- Fl1942 (talk · contribs)
- Frunzeapparat (talk · contribs)
- Grifter1405 (talk · contribs)
- Kiidd777 (talk · contribs)
- Lŋgwstks (talk · contribs)
- Loosecannon93 (talk · contribs)
- Madison Roy (talk · contribs)
- Melissa4S4 (talk · contribs)
- Mr. Wikipediania (talk · contribs)
- odhfan_01 (talk · contribs)
- otr500 (talk · contribs)
- Parkwells (talk · contribs)
- PGNormand (talk · contribs)
- Pikachudad (talk · contribs)
- PohranicniStraze (talk · contribs)
- sf46 (talk · contribs)
- skb8721 (talk · contribs)
- Srm gunner (talk · contribs)
- Tcr25 (talk · contribs)
- TheLionHasSeeen (talk · contribs)
- ukulele (talk · contribs)
- vernajast (talk · contribs)
- VerruckteDan (talk · contribs)
- TheCoolestKidHere
- Infrogmation (talk · contribs)
- Samwisep86 (talk · contribs)
- Aaron charles (talk · contribs)
- winstonho0805 (talk · contribs)
- Muffuletta (talk · contribs)
- Alainna (talk · contribs) 07:56, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- Avalyn (talk · contribs)
- ShreveNewsMan (talk · contribs)
- VerruckteDan (talk · contribs)
- Patriarca12 (talk · contribs)
- ArkansasTraveler (talk · contribs)
- Presidentman (talk · contribs)
- Bobster687 (talk · contribs)
- Sumori (talk · contribs)
- CarbonX (talk · contribs)
- AlphaEta (talk · contribs)
- Leodmacleod (talk · contribs)
- D.c.camero (talk · contribs)
- Nowhereman86 (talk · contribs)
- LadyRose2001 (talk · contribs)
- Bruin2 (talk · contribs)
- Nolabob (talk · contribs)
- Grifter1405 (talk · contribs)
- Paulscrawl (talk · contribs)
- TheCoolestKidHere
Vive la Louisiane! Il nous faut sauver
N'Oubliez pas L'Alamo!
--Doncram (talk,contribs) 01:24, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
- Quoi? LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 01:32, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
- No part of this required pinging like 80 people, nor did it require the bizarre tone of this entire message from start to finish. My favorite part is the one user you pinged that has been indefinitely blocked since 2015. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 01:33, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
- My issue is that WikiProject United States (in fact without agreement, but it was long ago) obtained an override over the WikiProject Louisiana and WikiProject New Orleans talk page banners. All the existing banners were replaced, and any new ones placed today are automatically replaced, by {{WikiProject United States|LA=yes|LA-importance=}} or {{WikiProject United States|class=|importance=|LA=Yes|LA-importance=|NOLA=Yes|NOLA-importance=}}. Which directs readers/editors at the 14,756 Louisiana articles, and at 2,724 New Orleans articles, to read at and post to this Talk page, instead using local Talk pages. People are less likely to brazenly post about local Louisiana things at a United States page (with my posting above at #Gene King country musician being an exception), and they are less likely to see and read any Louisiana postings anywhere. The experiment about moving Louisiana-topic discussions to here has failed.
- There are still new editors occasionally arriving and signing up as members at both Louisiana wikiprojects, who are not welcomed and integrated, and are likely frustrated. I am frustrated that they don't find much activity and that they, too, go away.
- I and others nonetheless occasionally do make postings at the local projects about local matters, and do want to have discussions or get comments, etc., but no discussion happens. Which is partly, perhaps largely, due to the misdirection of traffic by the WikiProject United States banners on all the projects' pages.
- The 80 or so persons pinged have either posted about Louisiana matters or they signed up (mostly long ago but also some recently) as current members of the two WikiProjects. It is fine and good for me to call for some discussion and reach out to them all. This is in fact the Talk page for all Louisiana matters, big and small, according to WikiProject United States.
- The same problem applies for many other states' WikiProjects, by the way, and it will be fine and good to ping many more hundreds of editors to come here on similar proposals. One or more times in the past I have tried to get these changes done by requests at the templates, but that didn't work, if I recall correctly, because I wasn't then able to convince an administrator-gatekeeper of the problem.
- So, anyhow, here, is there any other support besides mine, and/or are there no objections, to removing WikiProject United States banner from 17,480 articles' Talk pages, replacing it by Louisiana and New Orleans banners instead, and to disabling the automatic processes that have enforced the current bannering? --Doncram (talk,contribs) 03:41, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- Please correct me if I am wrong, but looking (for example) at ) 06:32, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- It doesn't have to be decided in 2 days. Thanks, that 2011 date helps me find my way to some of the archived discussions from back then. I strongly disliked the hijackings back then and have considered them to be a disaster all along.
- Perhaps the first discussion section was Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States/Archive 5#Suggestion for some of the Inactive, Defunct and semi active US related Wikiprojects, which started out
(Emphasis added by me) That was nonsense, IMHO.I have noticed that there seem to be a large number of US related WikiProjects that are either Inactive, Defunct or have minimal activity. I would like to recommend redirecting the talk pages of these to the WikiProject United States talk page. This will allow a more timely response to questions and suggestions....
- It developed further in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States/Archive 5#A consideration for cross project consolidation of talk page templates. The suggestion was that it would supposedly save on template maintenance (not ever a problem IMHO). Several strong objections were given, including:
- I consider these [example proposed new WPUS templates] mostly to be constructed backwards. I want it to say (big letters) the article Michigan is parrt of WikiProject Michigan (small letters) maybe consider looking at Project United States. Not: (big letters) this is WikiProject United States (small letters) oh maybe look at Michigan's wikisubproject too. I am not going to see Michigan-related (misposted?) discussion posted on the first prominent link in the template (United States) because I do not follow or want to follow that project. Rmhermen (talk) 20:36, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
- Im sorry I am not following what your trying to say. --talk) 20:39, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
- I think I follow his logic, and I tend to agree with it. What he's saying is that in all likelihood a consolidated banner would put WPUS front-and-center and relegate all of the subprojects to second-banana status on less visible lines below WPUS's main template message, since that's the way WPBannerMeta treats a project's task forces and subprojects. For that reason, I also ask that WP:NYbe excluded from a potential consolidation.
- [and]
- I think I follow his logic, and I tend to agree with it. What he's saying is that in all likelihood a consolidated banner would put WPUS front-and-center and relegate all of the subprojects to second-banana status on less visible lines below WPUS's main template message, since that's the way WPBannerMeta treats a project's task forces and subprojects. For that reason, I also ask that
- Im sorry I am not following what your trying to say. --
- Personally I don't see the point of this. All I can see this doing is choking out the small wikiprojects making them task forces of one huge project. (While they may have their own letters having a banner is a big way that wikiprojects advertise}--Guerillero | My Talk 21:28, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
- I consider these [example proposed new WPUS templates] mostly to be constructed backwards. I want it to say (big letters) the article Michigan is parrt of WikiProject Michigan (small letters) maybe consider looking at Project United States. Not: (big letters) this is WikiProject United States (small letters) oh maybe look at Michigan's wikisubproject too. I am not going to see Michigan-related (misposted?) discussion posted on the first prominent link in the template (United States) because I do not follow or want to follow that project. Rmhermen (talk) 20:36, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
- Please correct me if I am wrong, but looking (for example) at ) 06:32, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- So, anyhow, here, is there any other support besides mine, and/or are there no objections, to removing WikiProject United States banner from 17,480 articles' Talk pages, replacing it by Louisiana and New Orleans banners instead, and to disabling the automatic processes that have enforced the current bannering? --Doncram (talk,contribs) 03:41, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- Those objections were spot-on, IMHO. As I recall, what happened was: most or all of the relatively active state and city WikiProjects opted out. All the others, where there was not a reply within something like two days (over a weekend, to boot, probably), got folded in and, well, demolished.
- IMO the natural level of discussion in Wikipedia for many things like individual biographies and historic places is at a U.S. state level. The discussion may be intermittent, but in my experience (in some state wikiprojects that weren't folded in, I guess) it can still be constructive, even if slowly, over one or two or even five or more years! Local editors appreciate responses and take encouragement when they're pinged after long delay. Folding all such discussions into one WikiProject US forum, which oversees more than 400,000 articles, simply does not, did not, work. That eliminated all the slow discussions. The experiment failed, and I personally want to revive many of the WikiProjects that were subsumed, starting with Louisiana and New Orleans in this proposal. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 07:34, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- I don't think you could deny that most of the WikiProjects for each state are semi-inactive or inactive. Perhaps Louisiana is an exception, but the idea of directing editors to a more well-used talk page where their posts are more likely to get a response is sound logic. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:53, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
Hundreds and hundreds of category additions
The Cherokee Nation has gained official recognition over several counties in Oklahoma, though this appears to be mostly ceremonial, as many communities within its boundaries have little connection to it. There is a content dispute at Talk:Taylor Ferry, Oklahoma, regarding the addition of Category:Cherokee Nation, to every populated place within the Nation's huge boundaries. Your input is welcome. --Magnolia677 (talk) 14:00, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
- As this would presumably affect a wide number of articles, it would perhaps be best to shift the discussion somewhere other than the couple sentence stub talkpage, such as here or WT:WikiProject Oklahoma. CMD (talk) 15:38, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
- I'll post a link there to the discussion. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:43, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Allegations of United States support for the Khmer Rouge#Requested move 7 August 2023
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Allegations of United States support for the Khmer Rouge#Requested move 7 August 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 09:05, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:University of Arizona College of Optical Sciences#Requested move 28 July 2023
Minneapolis Featured article review
Requested move at Talk:John Dodson (fighter)#Requested move 12 August 2023
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:John Dodson (fighter)#Requested move 12 August 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 07:54, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
Notification of relevant WP:VPPR proposal
Hi guys; certain states which use townships as their second level administrative divisions are a point of concern for a recent proposal I made at Village Pump Proposals. The link to the discussion is at
Barbara Bush FAC
Barbara Bush is currently a candidate for featured article. Reviews and other feedback are appreciated. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 06:53, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
Help evaluate contradicting refs for RI area
Please join Talk:Rhode Island#Clear the area to resolve a dispute between two seemingly-reliable sources relating to land and water area for the state. DMacks (talk) 23:59, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Aleppo Township, Greene County, Pennsylvania#Requested move 23 August 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 20:49, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
Number of "families" in Census data
Many US cities list the number of people, households, and families residing in them. I can find census sources for the numbers of people and households, but not the families. Does anybody know where this is available? (American FactFinder has been replaced by Census Data Explorer.) Kk.urban (talk) 04:42, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
2022 Philadelphia shooting
2022 Philadelphia shooting has been nominated for deletion, if any project members wish to participate in the ongoing discussion or otherwise improve the entry. ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:39, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
I’m working on an article of a 1934 airplane crash in Iraq,
References
- ^ "Amerikaan Philip W. Ireland gearresteerd". De Locomotief (in Dutch). 2 February 1935 – via Delpher.
- Algemeen Handelsblad (in Dutch). 12 February 1935 – via Delpher.
One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!
Hello, |
Created a draft outline page for the Iran hostage crisis
The page is currently over at
Requesting inputs
Requesting inputs to review notability @ Talk:Anirudh Devgan#Notability for clearer consensus. Bookku (talk) 18:19, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Category:American Civil War biography stubs
Should Category:American Civil War biography stubs be split between Union and Confederate? Please discuss at CFD 2023 September 10. – Fayenatic London 21:11, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
1953 Korean dam bombing a war crime?
Anyone who is historian-minded want to evaluate whether the US bombing of Korean dams in WWII is a war crime? Then, take a look at: Talk:United States war crimes#why deletion of Korean dam bombing? – ishwar (speak) 04:38, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Women in Green's 5th Edit-a-thon
Hello WikiProject United States:
WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-long Good Article Edit-a-thon event in October 2023!
Running from October 1 to 31, 2023, WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) is hosting a Good Article (GA) edit-a-thon event with the theme Around the World in 31 Days! All experience levels welcome. Never worked on a GA project before? We'll teach you how to get started. Or maybe you're an old hand at GAs – we'd love to have you involved! Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing GA submissions related to women and women's works (e.g., books, films) during the event period. We hope to collectively cover article subjects from at least 31 countries (or broader international articles) by month's end. GA resources and one-on-one support will be provided by experienced GA editors, and participants will have the opportunity to earn a special WiG barnstar for their efforts.
We hope to see you there!
Grnrchst (talk) 13:53, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Draft review and c/e help
At my t/p, I had received help request from
History of the United States articles
I'm looking at the history of the United States articles, and I wanted to bring up the cutoff dates. Currently, the series is:
- Confederation Period
- History of the United States (1789–1849) - 60 years: Federalist Era, Jeffersonian Era, Era of Good Feelings, and Jacksonian Era
- History of the United States (1849–1865) - 16 years: Build up to the Civil War and the American Civil War
- Reconstruction Era, Gilded Age, Progressive Era
- History of the United States (1917–1945) - 28 years: United States in World War I, Roaring Twenties, Great Depression in the United States, and U.S. in World War II
- History of the United States (1945–1964) - 19 years: Post-War Era and Civil Rights Era
- History of the United States (1964–1980) - 16 years: Civil Rights Era and Vietnam War
- Reagan Era
- History of the United States (1991–2008) - 17 years: Post-Cold War Era
- History of the United States (2008–present) - 15+ years
1776-1789 makes sense as the history of the United States prior to the ratification of the constitution; I'm the primary author of that one, and I didn't have any issues putting it together given these solid boundaries. But some of the others seem arbitrary. And of course there's also the fact that two of them are much longer than the others. It seems that most of the cutoff dates were decided on a whim by a sockpuppet in 2003, and it might be worth reexamining them. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 00:36, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
- FWIW the library of congress uses these divisions:
- Colonial Settlement, 1600s - 1763 (our Colonial history of the United States)
- The American Revolution, 1763 - 1783 (Shifted a few years earlier than our equivalent)
- The New Nation, 1783 - 1815 (splitting after the war of 1812, unlike ours)
- National Expansion and Reform, 1815 - 1880 (at the end overlaps with civil war below and the material inside also seems aimed at being pre-civil war, so would take civil war as the end point here rather than 1880)
- Civil War and Reconstruction, 1861-1877 (they link the civil war with reconstruction, whereas we link the civil war with its buildup)
- Rise of Industrial America, 1876-1900 (civil war to WWII divisions don't correlate with ours, presumably as we use WWI as a divider)
- Progressive Era to New Era, 1900-1929
- Great Depression and World War II, 1929-1945
- The Post War United States, 1945-1968 (similar to our immediately post-WWII article)
@CMD @Thebiguglyalien - I Propose the following changes to the History of the United States article series
Change History of the United States (1991–2008) to History of the United States (1991–2010) - 10 years
Change History of the United States (2008–present) to History of the United States (2011–Present) - 12+ years
-- PaulGamerBoy360 (talk) 2:58, 2 Nov 2023 (UTC)
There is
Postal Service Reform Act on Louis DeJoy's article
Hello! My name is Jonathan and I work for the United States Postal Service. Over on postmaster general Louis DeJoy's Talk page, I'm asking editors to consider revising a sentence about Mr. DeJoy's role in getting the Postal Service Reform Act of 2022 passed. I won't get too deep into the details here, but the article currently characterizes Mr. DeJoy's involvement in a way that's slightly inaccurate, and isn't reflected in the majority of press coverage I've seen. Please see my Talk page post by following this link. Thanks in advance to anybody who takes a look! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 21:44, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
RFC
United States involvement in regime change in Latin America has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. WMrapids (talk) 18:35, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
Discussion at Talk:Progressivity in United States income tax
I started this discussion: Talk:Progressivity in United States income tax#Various polls by media organizations. George Ho (talk) 05:09, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
2023 in the United States collage submissions and discussion started
I have begun the submission and basic discussion process for the collage image for 2023 in the United States, which relates to this WikiProject. You can participate in the submissions/discussions here: Talk:2023 in the United States#Collage submissions. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 07:46, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
7 World Trade Center featured article review
I have nominated
The real events that inspired the movie The Sugarland Express
I just watched this last night, and was surprised to discover that not only was this based on real events and a couple did lead half the lawmen in Texas on slow-motion chase across a good portion of the state in 1969, but also somehow there is no article on those real events. There must have been significant coverage of it at the time, seeing as
Requested move at Talk:Johnny Beecher (ice hockey)#Requested move 25 October 2023
The Final Four (Survivor: Borneo) nominated for deletion
Link: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Final Four (Survivor: Borneo). George Ho (talk) 07:52, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
MoS discussion on terms like "Caucasian American"
Please see Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#Putting an end to using "Caucasian" for white Americans — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 16:43, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
FAR for Shaylee Mansfield
I have nominated
Proposed merger at Talk:2023 Israel–Hamas war hostage crisis
Editors have proposed merging the article
You are invited join the discussions at
Requested move at Talk:Alleged Saudi role in the September 11 attacks#Requested move 16 November 2023
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Alleged Saudi role in the September 11 attacks#Requested move 16 November 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Reading Beans (talk) 00:27, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Plymouth, Massachusetts
Plymouth, Massachusetts 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) 19:56, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Super Bowl XLI
Super Bowl XLI 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) 22:46, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Yavapai
Yavapai 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) 22:20, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Norfolk, Virginia
Norfolk, Virginia 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) 02:58, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
One World (TV series) nominated for deletion
There is a deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/One World (TV series). --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:39, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Bound for Glory (wrestling pay-per-view)
Bound for Glory (wrestling pay-per-view) 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 21:29, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
"Danish America" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect Danish America has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 December 25 § Danish America until a consensus is reached. -- 65.92.247.66 (talk) 23:32, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
Featured list removal nomination
I have nominated
Good article reassessment for McCarthyism
McCarthyism 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) 22:08, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Chambersburg, Pennsylvania
Chambersburg, Pennsylvania 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) 22:17, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Rescue of Bat 21 Bravo
Rescue of Bat 21 Bravo 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. BalinKingOfMoria (talk) 03:03, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri 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 15:17, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Impact! (TV series)#Requested move 4 January 2024
Requested move at Talk:Southern University and A&M College#Requested move 4 January 2024
Requested move at Talk:Jack Brewer (American football)#Requested move 5 January 2024
Requested move at Talk:Andrew Farmer#Requested move 5 January 2024
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Andrew Farmer#Requested move 5 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 23:45, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Nathan Hale (statue)#Requested move 6 January 2024
Requested move at Talk:History (American TV network)#Requested move 6 January 2024
Requested move at Talk:Superpredator myth#Requested move 8 January 2024
Requested move at Talk:Eric Berger (meteorologist)#Requested move 8 January 2024
Requested move at Talk:Statue of Roberto Clemente (Louisville, Kentucky)#Requested move 8 January 2024
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Statue of Roberto Clemente (Louisville, Kentucky)#Requested move 8 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 20:38, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Ohio State University#Requested move 8 January 2024
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Ohio State University#Requested move 8 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 23:02, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:New Democrats#Requested move 9 January 2024
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:New Democrats#Requested move 9 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 06:34, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Tri-Valley-San Joaquin Valley Regional Rail Authority#Requested move 3 January 2024
Requested move at Talk:Willapa people#Requested move 11 January 2024
Requested move at Talk:Virginia Beach, Virginia#Requested move 11 January 2024
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Virginia Beach, Virginia#Requested move 11 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:09, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Charles Francis Richter#Requested move 11 January 2024
Requested move at Talk:PEN15#Requested move 13 January 2024
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:PEN15#Requested move 13 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 18:53, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:The Beekeeper#Requested move 15 January 2024
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:The Beekeeper#Requested move 15 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 17:10, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Dave Hall (politician)#Requested move 25 December 2023
Hilst [talk]Silicon Slopes article
I'm working on the Wikipedia article for Silicon Slopes, which just so happens to be the area I live and work in. Honestly, the article currently sounds like a business brochure. I have decided to make a couple of changes to the article, and am posting this comment, in case someone wants to discuss the changes I'm making. This is an effort to communicate, as I recognize that many edits on Wikipedia get reversed because no one communicates their intentions. Our (myself and my co-worker) objective today is:
- Clarify the wording "dozens of tech startups" which is a limitation in phrasing. There should be no finite number or limitation to the companies in Utah County that wish to identify as being located within or near Silicon Slopes.
- A few banks are listed in the articles notable mentions sections, presumably as examples of Silicon Slopes companies. These banks in particular have no relation to tech industry startups, therefore I am removing them. The offenders are Zions Bank and Discover Card. Nothing against these companies, but they have nothing to do specifically with new tech company startups based in Silicon Slopes.
– Teaminvise (talk) 05:07, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
I'm looking for any help finishing out this draft article on Herschel the sea lion. Herschel and a rotating group of male sealions who wintered at the Ballard locks in Seattle were a National news from 1985 to about 1988ish due to the purported impact on salmon runs though the locks. I've got basic outline bits but I've bogged finding more specifics and rounding out the article.--Kevmin § 16:48, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
i want to become a member
could i be a member of WikiProject United States? Minecraft812 (talk) 19:42, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
Future-class
Hello project members! Note that per
|future=yes which would then populate a category. Alternatively it could just be removed and then the articles in Category:Future-Class United States articles would inherit the quality rating from other projects on the talk page — Martin (MSGJ · talk- Does anyone know where it was decided that Future-class was non-standard? I've seen this used for a very long time. Also, WP US is a huge project, and therefore I wouldn't expect a fast rollout of such a change. Last, I can't know in advance if there will be any buy-in issues or not, but that possibility is there. Stefen Towers among the rest! Gab • Gruntwerk 01:20, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Stefen, there is no "fast rollout" happening. The project was first consulted in February 2023 and then informed of the results of the RfC in April 2023. We are just now starting to implement the decision. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:41, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- I meant that you can't expect a fast technical rollout from here out because it's not like flipping a switch on this mammoth project. Stefen Towers among the rest! Gab • Gruntwerk 03:58, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- The technical change is straightforward - I can make this change later today unless there are any questions? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:43, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
- I don't see how it's straightforward, because this will involve internal changes to projects that use and sometimes in verbiage refer to that class. Altering a mass of templates is just the beginning. Stefen Towers among the rest! Gab • Gruntwerk 17:37, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
- The technical change is straightforward - I can make this change later today unless there are any questions? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:43, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
- I meant that you can't expect a fast technical rollout from here out because it's not like flipping a switch on this mammoth project. Stefen Towers among the rest! Gab • Gruntwerk 03:58, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Stefen, there is no "fast rollout" happening. The project was first consulted in February 2023 and then informed of the results of the RfC in April 2023. We are just now starting to implement the decision. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:41, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- As a general reply (to WP US), are there any plans to add
|future=yesto this project's template? I was accustomed to having Future-Class articles in projects I work on and now there's no way to set it. Stefen Towers among the rest! Gab • Gruntwerk 20:35, 10 December 2023 (UTC)- Offhand, I can think of two subjects within the primary wikiproject I participate in that will have plenty of RS coverage before they happen, so it would be nice to set them as "future" once their articles are created: 2024 Kentucky Derby and Ali (musical). Stefen Towers among the rest! Gab • Gruntwerk 00:00, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
Infoboxes of the Democratic & Republican parties
Hello. There's a discussion taking place concerning what are the governing bodies of the Democratic & Republican parties. What should be in the parties' infoboxes. GoodDay (talk) 04:37, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
Revising philanthropy section in Louis DeJoy article
Hello! I recently posted on the Louis DeJoy Talk page to propose a few edits to the Other donations and board work section. Since this WikiProject is listed on that Talk page, I thought it might be a good place to find independent editors interested in reviewing those proposed edits.You can take a look at what I've put together by following this link.
In case it isn't clear from my username, I'm a United States Postal Service employee. In reaching out to this WP, I'm trying to follow Wikipedia's conflict of interest editing rules, which stipulate that I can suggest changes to articles in which I have an interest, but I need uninterested members of the community to review and implement them. Thanks in advance to anyone who helps out with my request! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 21:39, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
Merge proposal
There is a merge proposal to merge
- More input and/or a close are requested in this case. The Banner talk 13:16, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
Formal name of armed forces of the United States
At Template talk:United States Armed Forces informal discussions are taking place about whether the main article title, United States Armed Forces, is the best place to have the article. I initially raised these concerns when I noticed that the style "United States Armed Forces" is not referred to in United States Code, Annotated. The nearest thing in U.S. Code is "the armed forces."
All are encouraged and welcome to put their views at the bottom of that talkpage
Good article reassessment for Water supply and sanitation in the United States
Water supply and sanitation in the United States 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 02:20, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
CleanupWorklist display of importance and class in alphabetic listings
For WP US subprojects that use CleanupWorklist (example) and miss the Importance/Class data on the Alphabetic listing (example), you can now get that data back as of the next CleanupWorklistBot run if you edit the bot's master per the editor instructions at the top ("The assessment project name can be overridden by..."). Stefen Towers among the rest! Gab • Gruntwerk 20:19, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States/Hispanic and Latino Americans task force#Proposed HLA-importance fixes, which is within the scope of this WikiProject. Best, —a smart kitten[meow] 21:50, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
Articles for small county-level institutions
There are a few articles floating around on county-level institutions. I understand this when these institutions serve very populous areas (i.e., major urban centers - examples include Clark County Commission, Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, and Metropolitan Council of Nashville and Davidson County), but there are some institutions serving smaller areas (examples from my own home state include Montgomery County Alcohol Beverage Services and Howard County Department of Planning and Zoning) that do not, in my mind, rise to the same level of notability. No doubt, many of these articles almost certainly meet the GNG (local and sometimes even state-level sources regularly report on happenings at the latest county council meeting, board of education meeting, etc.), but on some level these articles feel like they would work better incorporated into the county's primary article.
Ultimately, my question (which I'm sure has been answered before, I just can't quite find where) is whether there has simply not been the will among article-writers to create these articles (for county councils and other major county government bodies), or whether some policy/guideline/informal agreement prevents these separate article from being written. AviationFreak💬 19:17, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Shooting of Mohamed Bah#Requested move 17 January 2024
Requested move at Talk:California's 1st State Senatorial district#Requested move 17 January 2024
Good article reassessment for Leslie Nielsen
Leslie Nielsen 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. Spinixster (chat!) 02:15, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
Invite to join the February 2024 Unreferenced Backlog Drive
| WikiProject Unreferenced articles | February 2024 Backlog Drive |  |
|
There is a substantial backlog of unsourced articles on Wikipedia, especially for United States-related articles! The purpose of this drive is to add sources to these articles and make a meaningful impact towards improving Wikipedia as a whole.
|
- Also, according to WP:Petscan, 61470/113000 unsourced articles belongs to Category:United States and has {{Unreferenced}}. We need a lot of help sourcing these geostubs! CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 07:55, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
- @CactiStaccingCrane: Please be sure to inform WP US's many subprojects too. This sounds like a very needed effort. Stefen Towers among the rest! Gab • Gruntwerk 09:15, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you! The article scope is still waiting to be determined, but if more members join in the drive, we would be able to cover more articles in a month. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 09:24, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
- It looks like WP US is already in your scope. I'm just saying that people in the WP US subprojects (including many states and cities) won't necessarily see this notice here. Stefen Towers among the rest! Gab • Gruntwerk 10:04, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
- Ah, I understand what you meant by that now. I don't want to spam all of the subprojects though, so I just gonna post this notice to subprojects with some editor activity. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 10:09, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
- Sounds fair. I wouldn't think of this as spam, though. You're welcome at the Louisville and Kentucky projects, as far as I'm concerned. Stefen Towers among the rest! Gab • Gruntwerk 10:17, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
- Ah, I understand what you meant by that now. I don't want to spam all of the subprojects though, so I just gonna post this notice to subprojects with some editor activity. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 10:09, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
- It looks like WP US is already in your scope. I'm just saying that people in the WP US subprojects (including many states and cities) won't necessarily see this notice here. Stefen Towers among the rest! Gab • Gruntwerk 10:04, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you! The article scope is still waiting to be determined, but if more members join in the drive, we would be able to cover more articles in a month. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 09:24, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at United States Capitol rotunda
A request to uppercase 'Rotunda' is ongoing at Talk:United States Capitol rotunda#Requested move 22 January 2024, thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:20, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Zenas Bliss
Zenas Bliss 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. Onegreatjoke (talk) 16:50, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:United States border security concerns#Requested move 23 January 2024
Good article reassessment for Dean Smith
Dean Smith 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 02:17, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Omaha, Nebraska
Omaha, Nebraska 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) 03:09, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Great Salt Lake
Great Salt Lake 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. CMD (talk) 07:49, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for History of The Simpsons
History of The Simpsons 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) 11:39, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Hispanic Heritage Baseball Museum#Requested move 30 January 2024
Requested move at Talk:Edward Clark (artist)#Requested move 30 January 2024
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:List of newspapers in the United States#Requested move 1 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:30, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Giovanni Reyna#Requested move 2 February 2024
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Giovanni Reyna#Requested move 2 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:31, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:List of entertainment affected by the September 11 attacks#Requested move 12 February 2024
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:List of entertainment affected by the September 11 attacks#Requested move 12 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 01:59, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:USS Stark incident#Requested move 12 February 2024
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:USS Stark incident#Requested move 12 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 02:00, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Split proposal at History of the United States (1789–1849)
There is a split discussion at
Good article reassessment for Roads and freeways in metropolitan Phoenix
Roads and freeways in metropolitan Phoenix 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) 04:32, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Life, the Universe, & Everything#Requested move 18 February 2024
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Life, the Universe, & Everything#Requested move 18 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – Hilst [talk] 11:35, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Ryan Binkley#Requested move 25 February 2024
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Ryan Binkley#Requested move 25 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:50, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Wright brothers
Wright brothers 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) 00:57, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:KTON (AM)#Requested move 1 March 2024
Requested move at Talk:New York#Requested move 4 March 2024
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:New York#Requested move 4 March 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 11:49, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:New River (North Carolina)#Requested move 24 February 2024
Requested move at Talk:Progressive Party (United States, 1912–1920)#Requested move 18 March 2024
Requested move at Talk:Black Irish (folklore)#Requested move 19 March 2024
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Black Irish (folklore)#Requested move 19 March 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. RodRabelo7 (talk) 00:41, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Seton Hall reports#Requested move 28 March 2024
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Seton Hall reports#Requested move 28 March 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:12, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Kansas City Chiefs
Kansas City Chiefs 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 18:48, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
"Wikipedia:USR" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect Wikipedia:USR has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 9 § Wikipedia:USR until a consensus is reached. Aaron Liu (talk) 23:32, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
WP:FLRC
I have nominated
Requested move at Talk:Puyallup people#Requested move 21 February 2024
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Puyallup people#Requested move 21 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:27, 22 February 2024 (UTC)