Talk:Bothell, Washington/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: SounderBruce (talk · contribs) 06:09, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: MagentaCat1 (talk · contribs) 18:16, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Heya imma be taking on reviewing this one (might take me a little bit given that it's my first review and I work a lot) MagentaCat1 (talk) 18:16, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Funky writing stuffs :3

• “ ƛ̕ax̌ʷadis” is technically written in latin characters but reading from an English perspective it looks about as familiar as Greek. It isn’t technically a MOS violation but it compromises readability. Try and see if you can find an Anglicanization of the word somewhere, and if you can’t consider changing the phrasing of “but the village of ƛ̕ax̌ʷadis was later destroyed” to something like “but the Sammamish village was later destroyed.”
  • Any translation needs to be run through a reliable source first, and I am not seeing any that are accessible and not self-published.
    • This is acceptable then
• “Although the Sammamish resisted removal efforts by settlers” who were these settlers? Although with any knowledge of PNW history one can infer they were some variety of white people, it doesn’t hurt to specify their flavor (Americans, British, French, ect.)
  • It is not specified in sources, so it cannot be included.
    • Both sources seem to indicate Canadians but it is unclear enough that it can be kept how it is.
• “but the village of ƛ̕ax̌ʷadis was later destroyed.” Specify who did the destroying (“was later destroyed by the settlers” would work nicely)
  • Again, not specified in a reliable source.
• “Bothell was incorporated as a fourth-class town on April 14, 1909” what on earth is a fourth-class town? Given that there is nothing to link to elsewhere for a clarification, I’d either the town class entirely, or provide an extremely brief explanation. (I’m not sure if the town class is important or not, given that I have absolutely no idea what the differences are.)
  • Linked to City government in Washington (state), which has the explanation; the class is needed for historical context and is mentioned frequently by HistoryLink, which is a pretty good way of determining its importance.
• “At the time, the town had a population of 599 residents” feels redundant given that the 1910 census data which has the same numbers is located in the table in demographics.
  • It fits with the rest of the sentence's content and a little redundancy is fine in my view; forcing readers to scroll down a few sections to figure out the population is not intuitive.
• “Passenger traffic on the railroad, how under the management of Northern Pacific, ceased in 1938.” typo, I fixed it myself.
  • Thanks for spotting that.
• “ The 1990s also saw more high tech businesses relocate to Bothell, including biotechnology firms, call centers, and manufacturers of medical equipment and electronics.” I wouldn’t consider call centers to be high tech, I’d separate call centers from the list of high tech industries.
  • Changed to "technology businesses", as making that determination would be WP:OR.
• “ The highest point in the city is Nike Hill, a former Nike missile silo that sits 510 feet (160 m) above sea level” if the hill itself was literally a missile silo then this is written fine. If there is a former silo atop the hill then I’d recommend you rephrase it.
  • Reworded.
• I don't expect you to do this at all, but the list of subareas in the geography section could seriously benefit from a map (not at all a requirement, just a fun suggestion if you wanted to do it).
  • Maybe if I can get QGIS to play nice with my PC. One of the updates broke my workflow and I haven't bothered to try and set it up again.
• “The city has a large concentration of Asian Americans, of which 33 percent identify as Indian and 29 percent identify as Chinese, and Hispanic/Latino Americans. Approximately 20 percent of Bothell residents were born outside the United States, an increase from 11 percent reported in 2000” as of when?
  • Added year to the last sentence.
• The religion information in the Demographics section isn’t referring to actual religious population statistics, but is just noting a select few places of worship. This would make more sense in the Culture section, but given that it is such a brief mention and only refers to places of worship significant to the Asian community in Bothell, unless you want to add material about other places of worship, I’d recommend removing it entirely
  • It is meant to tie into the demographic information in the same paragraph, so it is appropriate in my view.
    • I understand that it is meant to tie in, but it isn't a demographic, it's a cultural feature.
• “The mean commute travel time was 30.2 minutes with more than 57 percent of residents driving alone to work, 26 percent working from home, and under 6 percent using public transportation.” These statistics would make more sense in the Transportation subsection of Infrastructure.
  • The statistics are meant to tie into the workforce data, which is why they are bundled there by the Census Bureau.
• “ Unlike other major suburbs, Bothell lacks a major big box retailers and traditional shopping centers but has several commercial districts that are anchored by supermarket stores.” This is just untrue, from an extremely brief scan on google maps Bothell has a Home Depot and a Fred Meyer, both of which are cited as examples of Big-box store, in fact Fred Meyer is actually the OG American big box store from the 30’s.
  • Changed to "many", but anything further would constitute OR if contradicting a reliable source.
    • The source states "Some regional-serving businesses, including “big-box” retail outlets and businesses which sell high-cost items like automobiles, are located along major corridors with high-visibility (e.g., SR 527, SR 522, and near I-405). A limited number of smaller neighborhood-serving businesses are also located throughout the residential areas," this blatantly contradicts the point you are trying to make, please remove it entirely.
• “The Parks and Recreation Department also organizes recreational activities for residents at city parks and facilities, including sport leagues, concerts, yoga, and instructional classes;[216] these programs were cancelled due to the COVID-19 pandemic” cancelled is British, I changed it to canceled for you. It is unclear to me whether this section is saying that classes were canceled during the pandemic and have since resumed, or if they were canceled because of the pandemic and never resumed. If they were canceled and have not resumed it honestly seems like a pretty mundane thing to include in the article, and even if they are still continuing class offerings of these types frequently change and keeping this section up to date would constitute an unnecessary for a very minor thing. I’d recommend removing this entirely, or changing it to something along the lines of “The Parks and Recreation Department also organizes recreational activities.”
  • This was written years ago, so I have removed the COVID bit but the listings are pretty standard and not expected to change year-to-year barring another global event.
• “It is the 10th largest school district in Washington state,[238] with 35 schools and an enrollment of 23,577 students as of 2020. The district is governed by a five-member school board elected from geographic districts, of which three include portions of Bothell.” This is information for Northshore School District’s article, not Bothell’s.
  • It is relevant to the city, especially mentioning how much of Bothell is represented on the school board.
    • My apologies, I was unclear with what I meant there. The information regarding how much of Bothell is represented is very much relevant, the enrolment information is not.
• “Two of the district's other high schools, Inglemoor in Kenmore and North Creek in unincorporated Snohomish County (opened in 2017), also serve Bothell residents.” Were both Inglemoor and North Creek opened in 2017, or just North Creek? If only North Creek was opened in 2017 why is there an opening year for North Creek but not Inglemoor?
  • Removed the year.

Overall the article seems solid, barring the small concerns mentioned above, it is extremely well written and well cited. MagentaCat1 (talk) 22:47, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

• (Since Magenta invited me to make a comment) Regarding point 1, there is a park in Kenmore which was named after the village. The official name is ƛ̕ax̌ʷadis, but it gives "Tl'awh-ah-dees" as a secondary name.[1] I remember there being some discussion about removing hyphens from Native American names at WP:IPNA, so either Tl'awhahdees (Lushootseed: ƛ̕ax̌ʷadis) or Tl'awh-ah-dees (Lushootseed: ƛ̕ax̌ʷadis) could work, since the original Lushootseed is preserved in the article for those interested, but is more? readable. I'm not sure if there are any other alternatives. Personally, I think the first looks nicer, but its not literally what the source says, and that's just my opinion. Regarding the third point, and SounderBruce correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think the source says explicitly that it was destroyed by settlers (it is implied). Hence why it wasn't included. PersusjCP (talk) 22:55, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Disputes regarding native history

I have some concerns regarding the disputes you had concerning the native history of Bothell with @PersusjCP. The conclusions seems to have been to implement her changes. I would like a confirmation from you that you don't plan on reverting that section back to how you had it before Persus's edits, hence ensuring stability. MagentaCat1 (talk) 22:41, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

@MagentaCat1: This comment should probably be struck, lest you be seen as an involved party in the dispute. SounderBruce 05:49, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

I am not involved, I had concerns about the articles stability with regards to edit waring. An article must be stable as per criteria 5. I will not be striking this comment. MagentaCat1 (talk) 06:31, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

I would also like to add on to my previous comment that the dispute seems to me to be resolved, and I just wanted to confirm such. If it is indeed resolved it will not affect this review.MagentaCat1 (talk) 06:39, 10 August 2024 (UTC)