Talk:List of Alaska borough seats
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Revert explanation
editI reverted because both the edits were in error; Anchorage isn't a "Municipality and Borough" because there's no such thing. The name "Municipality" means it's a merged city and borough. Also, I don't think the census areas belong here because it's a list of borough seats, and census areas by definition have no seat. There's already a list of the entities themselves—List of boroughs and census areas in Alaska—which has the census areas listed, as the name implies. —Zero Gravitas 16:57, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Comment on Revert
editI'll yield to the reverter's expertise on the fine points of the difference between a Municipality, a Municipality and Borough, a City and borough, and just a borough. I would note however, that virtually all reference works I have seen (including the Census figures) simply use the term "Borough" for Anchorage. As for adding Census Areas, I certainly recognize that they do not have a "seat" and explained that. I also agree that they should not be intermingled with the boroughs. However, in the interest of having a comprehensive list, I thought it was worthwhile to include them, since they are separately listed and enumerated in most other reference works, and since I could not perceive any harm or confusion by including them. Obvioulsy, I was insufficiently sensitive to the reverter's apparent pride of authorship. I will try to remember for the future that edits to this page are unwelcome -- Macinwwwv 01:15, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
- There's no need at all for that sort of attitude. The first wasn't any sort of "fine point" ... just an incorrect name. I agree, it's often cited as "Anchorage Borough" for the sake of consistency (most places are used to the fixed form XXX County, XXX Parish, or XXX Borough), but that isn't what it's called.
- For the census areas, if you want to add them back (or have someone else do it), that's no problem by me, but it seems kind of external to the point of this article since -- as I said -- there's already a list of them. —Zero Gravitas 01:56, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
- I've put the list back myself, actually. Sorry if I was being too bold; I'll admit I probably should have brought it to talk first. I just don't see the need for the duplication, though. —Zero Gravitas 02:04, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
- My apologies if I came across as having an attitude. I'm new at this, and I have tried hard to avoid offending more experienced contributors, while trying to improve both consistency in content and appearance, and comprehensiveness. So I was a bit taken aback at the removal of what I thought though certainly not critically needed, at least did no harm. I appreciate the willingness to compromise, and I shall try to be both more measured and less hasty in any future comments. I have also added a Census Area that I inadvertently omitted originally. -- Macinwwwv 03:58, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
- And you're right, there's no real harm to having it there. Glad to have that settled out, though. —Zero Gravitas 04:04, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
- My apologies if I came across as having an attitude. I'm new at this, and I have tried hard to avoid offending more experienced contributors, while trying to improve both consistency in content and appearance, and comprehensiveness. So I was a bit taken aback at the removal of what I thought though certainly not critically needed, at least did no harm. I appreciate the willingness to compromise, and I shall try to be both more measured and less hasty in any future comments. I have also added a Census Area that I inadvertently omitted originally. -- Macinwwwv 03:58, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
- I've put the list back myself, actually. Sorry if I was being too bold; I'll admit I probably should have brought it to talk first. I just don't see the need for the duplication, though. —Zero Gravitas 02:04, 11 May 2006 (UTC)