Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities/Archive 21

Archive 15

←

Archive 19

Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

Nomination of Portal:Geneva for deletion

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

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

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:12, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Singapore

Singapore, an article of interest to this project, has been nominated for Good Article. It seems possible for it to become a Good Article, though it needs tidying up. If anyone is interested in helping out, see the review: Talk:Singapore/GA3. SilkTork (talk) 16:25, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Portal:Nairobi for deletion

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

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

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:08, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Kolkata review

I have nominated Kolkata for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. DrKay (talk) 08:11, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

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

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Information about Franklin in Tennessee (from above user)

Extended content Franklin is the 7th largest city in Tennessee with a population of 78,321 according to population estimates from July 1, 2018 and is part of the Nashville Metropolitan Area.[1] (https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/franklincitytennessee/PST045218 United States Census Bureau, Quick Facts, Franklin city, TN) The City of Franklin was ranked 8th fastest growing city in the nation by the U.S. Census Bureau growing 4.9 percent between July1, 2016 and July 1, 2017. [2](https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2018/estimates-cities.html United State Census Bureau, “Census Bureau Reveals Fastest-Growing Large Cities, May 24, 2018 ) The median age in Franklin is 38.3, with a medianr household income of $85,149 [3] The City is located approximately 20 miles south of downtown Nashville and is the county seat of Williamson County, TN. [4] Williamson County is well known for some of the highest ranked schools in the country and top graduation rates in the state. More than 54 percent of residents hold a bachelor’s degree or higher. [5]

Cool Springs, a business district within the City of Franklin is home to several fortune 500 headquarters, many in the healthcare industry. [6] (https://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2009/states/TN.html CNN Money, Fortune 500) Franklin is home to a satellite campus of Tennessee’s first community college, Columbia State. It is a two-year college, serving a nine-county area in the Middle Tennessee area. Columbia State opened their first campus in Columbia, TN in 1966, they opened the Williamson/Franklin campus later near Franklin High School, but built and opened a brand new Franklin campus in 2016.[7] (https://www.columbiastate.edu/athletics/news/2014/07/22/columbia-state-breaks-ground-on-williamson-campus)

The Harpeth River flows through the City of Franklin and has several canoe access points within City parks. The river is popular to fish and paddle.[8] [9] Franklin has more than 700 acres of park land divided into 16 parks that include historic parks, passive parks and athletic fields.[10] The City of Franklin was founded October 26, 1799 by Abram Maury Jr. who was also a State Senator and named after Benjamin Franklin, a close friend of Dr. Hugh Williamson, a member of the Continental Congress for whom Williamson County was named.[11]

In 1908 the Interurban railroad (an electric train) was completed and ran from Franklin to Nashville and carried both passengers and freight. The train converted to gasoline in 1942 and ceased operations in 1969.[12]

Downtown Franklin is nationally recognized for historic preservation and is well known for it’s quaint Main Street and is part of the nationally known Mainstreet Program[13] and Civil War tourism. (https://williamsonherit age.org/preservation/, Williamson Heritage Foundation Preservation Program. ) In 1864 the Battle of Franklin took place. Community leaders have preserved several landmarks including the Carter House, Carnton Plantation, and several portions of the battlefield over the last 15 years.[14] The town square is home to a confederate monument that was erected in 1899 on the 35th anniversary of the Battle of Franklin by the United Daughters of the Confederacy. [15] In the last couple years a group of pastors and historians along with City government have moved to tell the “Fuller Story” about the Civil War to include the experience of African Americans in the City. Historic Markers will soon be placed in the town square telling the stories of a Market House where slaves were sold, Reconstruction after the civil war, the Franklin Riot of 1867 and the U.S. Colored Troops. There will also be a statue erected near the courthouse of a USCT soldier.[16] The group was inspired by a national tragedy in Charlottesville, Virginia.[17] [18][19]

References

"Tennessee Demographics by Cubit". https://www.tennessee-demographics.com/cities_by_population,. Cubit Planning Inc. Retrieved 1 March 2019. External link in |website= (help)
"United States Census Bureau". United States Census Bureau-Quick Facts. United States Census Bureau. Retrieved 1 March 2019.
"Community Profiles". Williamson Chamber Inc. Williamson Inc. Retrieved 1 March 2019.
"Map Quest Franklin description". MapQuest. Mapquest. Retrieved 1 March 2019.
"Williamson Chamber-Education". Williamson Chamber. Williamson Inc. Retrieved 28 Feb 2019.
"CNN Fortune 500". CNN. CNN. Retrieved 27 February 2019.
"Columbia State Breaks Ground on Williamson Campus". Columbia State. Columbia State Community College. Retrieved 1 March 2019.
[www.harpethconservancy.org/programs/recreation/accesspoints "Harpeth Conservancy Recreation"] Check |url= value (help). Harpeth Conservancy. Harpeth Conservancy. Retrieved 1 March 2019.
) "Trout are back in Harpeth River" Check |url= value (help). Franklin Home Page. Franklin Home Page. Retrieved 1 March 2019.
"City of Franklin Parks". City of Franklin. City of Franklin. Retrieved 25 February 2019.
"Franklin Description". MapQuest. MapQuest. Retrieved 28 February 2019.
"Interurban Waymark Sign". Waymarking.com. Waymarking.com. Retrieved 1 March 2019.
"Main Street Program". Williamson Heritage Foundation. Williamson Heritage Foundation. Retrieved 1 March 2019.
"American Battlefield Trust, Restoring a Battlefield". American Battlefield Trust. American Battlefield Trust.
Gregory Wade (September 1,2011). "Franklin's Iconic Confederate Statue". Franklin Home Page. Franklin Home Page. Retrieved 1 March 2019. Check date values in: |date= (help)
Emily West (February 26, 2019). )history-markers-franklin-public-square/2998466002/ "Final Approval: African-American History Markers will go in Franklin's square" Check |url= value (help). The Tennessean. The Tennessean. Retrieved 1 March 2019.
Emily West (January 17, 2019). [(https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/local/williamson/2019/01/17/franklin-tn-confederate-statue-group-shares-slavery-civil-rights-history/2536980002/ "Franklin Confederate Statue Group shares slavery civil rights history"] Check |url= value (help). The Tennessean. Gannett.
Kerri Bartlett (August 14, 2018). "Three Preachers and a Historian tell fuller story by proposing Civil War monument, markers on slavery". The Williamson Herald. Williamson Herald.
"The Fuller Story". Tennessee Holler Youtube Page. The Tennessee Holler/City of Franklin TN.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by TennesseeTex (talk • contribs) 22:09, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Reply 1-MAR-2019 Breezeicons-emblems-8-emblem-unavailable.svg Unable to implement It is agreed that the current state of the lead section is poor, in that it inordinately focuses on one aspect of the city whilst leaving out passages of text which might go further in satisfying the lead section's summative requirements. The COI editor's response to that problem is equally poor, in that they have proposed text which is insufficiently paraphrased from the source material — much of it being promotional materials taken directly from the City's web portal, with only a cursory attempt at rewriting what was taken. The required changes which are needed are clear. The different sections of the article ought to be summarized and placed into the lead section in order to assist readers in their perusal of the article. This lead section ought to be balanced according to the weight of what reliable sources say about the subject — ideally, a mixture of the good along with the bad and the historical along with the contemporary — all in an effort to achieve an evenly-WP:WEIGHTED article. To begin, I would recommend taking these issues to WikiProject Cities in an attempt to garner assistance and feedback from the editors there. Regards, Spintendo 00:20, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Census-designated places "may not precisely correspond to local understanding of the area" in the lead

I'm starting to see that phrasing or something similar appear in the lead of various United States census-designated place articles.[1] I decided to also add it to a couple pages before I was asked about it on my talk page.[2] So has there been an actual discussion that we can point this editor to? If not, I guess my preference would be that we should probably make it clear that any Census figures in the lead do reflect how the U.S. Census Bureau defines the area, not the local or common understanding, or else we may mislead readers (I'm sure many of you living outside the United States never heard of what a census-designated place was before joining this WikiProject, and how CDPs could either be larger or smaller than the common understanding of the area). Thanks. Zzyzx11 (talk) 01:11, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Here is the best discussion I have seen - WikiProject Cities/US Guideline|US cities RFC April 2015 - CDPs are a way to learn about the population of an area as established by the Census bureau but the community where they are counting people existed before they labeled it and will exist after they eliminate that particular CDP label. The statement you point out is in the RFC which accompanies it with For statistical purposes, the United States Census Bureau has defined Foo as a census-designated place (CDP) to explain why that community has been redefined by the census bureau. Also the first sentence in the lead would be "Foo is an unincorporated community in Foo County, Foo State, United States." Fettlemap (talk) 02:09, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

@Zzyzx11: Any census data really should reflect the census definition of the area. How else would the census data be derived without original research? The purpose of CDP designation is to allow comparisons with other urbanized areas. Since the places are unincorporated, there is an element of arbitrariness in how the boundaries of a CDP get defined. The Census Bureau works with local officials in defining and naming such areas, but even so, you can find cases where people identify themselves with an area even though they may reside outside the CDP boundaries. Conversely, sometimes several neighborhoods with distinct identities to locals might get subsumed under a single CDP. However, I'm really not sure I see much benefit in stating that a CDP "may not precisely correspond to local understanding of the area" in the lead. In fact, unless there is some verifiable evidence to warrant such a claim, it could be misleading. older ≠ wiser 03:20, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

I do not think this line is necessary unless there is a source discussing the difference between the census and local understanding. No other part of the article relies on this, and the census derives its definitions from local understanding to begin with so there's no need to make blanket disclaimers. Reywas92^Talk 04:04, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

The Census Bureau creates CDP and grabs a local name or makes up one for statistical purposes. I just seen so many cases locally where the boundary has little to do with the common understanding. I don't think our area is special so I assume this confusion is widespread. No one says they live in a CDP, that is why the first line should mention the unincorporated community. The CDP is good for discussing population and nothing else. Fettlemap (talk) 04:36, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

• Ok, I see objections to that blanket disclaimer, and the 2015 RFC that the first sentence should start with defining the settlement primarily as an unincorporated area. But should the fact that such a CDP even exists be mentioned at all when giving the population figure in the lead? Or should it be on a case-by-case basis, especially when the Census Bureau combines multiple communities into a single CDP? Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:53, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Absolutely yes, being a CDP is what allows us to have population figures in the first place. Start with calling it an unincorporated community then use "for statistical purposes" when mentioning the CDP and population and that the population is of the CDP.
    • Normally, WP articles are about the common understanding of a place, not about CDPs. I like the "statistical purposes" wording better than the other. Anyway, it is annoying to have to wade through all the wordage. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 13:42, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
    • @BeenAroundAWhile:, wondering if you find moving a sentence to the Geography section as shown here in Darwin, California to be less annoying. I do think a blanket warning is important given the sometimes obsessive edits over the definition of neighborhoods that occurs. This seems like a similar situation. Cheers, Fettlemap (talk) 00:39, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Assistance at Liverpool

Can someone cast their eye over the Liverpool talk page, and recent edit / reverts and contribute some input. Getting into an edit war over something so pointless is just making my brain go 'weeeee'. Cheers. Koncorde (talk) 22:31, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Population figures of urban areas and metro areas in city's article lead section

It's apparently pretty standard to show official figures for urban areas and metro areas in the lead section of most cities articles. This is the case for most US cities as it is for most French cities. However, for a reason I ignore, it is not the case for the Paris article. Official metro area population figure (12,569,692 inhabitants [1]) only appears once in the infobox and the urban area figure (10,733,970 inhabitants [2]) doesn't appear at all in the whole article.

It's particularly weird as it seems to be the case only in the English article. I haven't browsed articles in all languages but all those I've seen had those figures mentionned in their lead section, including those which has been labeled "good article" such as the Croatian or Hebrew ones. Metropolitan (talk) 17:08, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

New bot to remove completed infobox requests

Hello! I have recently created a bot to remove completed infobox requests and am sending this message to WikiProject Cities since the project currently has a backlogged infobox request category. Details about the task can be found at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/PearBOT 2, but in short it removes all infobox requests from articles with an infobox, once a week. To sign up, reply with {{ping|Trialpears}} and tell me if any special considerations are required for the Wikiproject. For example: if only a specific infobox should be detected, such as {{infobox journal}} for WikiProject Academic Journals; or if an irregularly named infobox such as {{starbox begin}} should be detected. Feel free to ask if you have any questions!

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

RfC about image relevance in articles at Talk:Minneapolis

An editor has started three RfC's at Talk:Minneapolis regarding image relevance. The input of others editors is welcome. Magnolia677 (talk) 00:11, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Discussion on photomontage for Sydney

Hey there! A discussion on what to illustrate, and which images to include, in a potential {{Photo montage}} for the Sydney article is currently taking place at Talk:Sydney#Selection of images for a photomontage. Feel free to join in on the discussion and share your thoughts on the matter! – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 22:30, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject History needs people

Hi everyone. I am the new coordinator for WikiProject History. we need people there!! right now the project seems to be semi-inactive. I am going to various WikiProjects whose topics overlap with ours, to request volunteers.

• If you have any experience at all with standard WikiProject processes such as quality assessment, article help, asking questions, feel free to come by and get involved.

• and if you have NO Experience, but just want to come by and get involved, feel free to do so!!!

• For anyone who wants to get involved, please come by and add your name at our talk page, at our talk page section: WikiProject History needs you!!!!

• Alternately, if you have any interest at all, feel free to reply right here, on this talk page. please ping me when you do so, by typing {{ping|sm8900}} in your reply.

we welcome your input. thanks!! --Sm8900 (talk) 20:47, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Infobox clutter

(Discussion was brought up at Template talk:Infobox settlement)

Recently, I've noticed editors adding unnecessary amounts of information to U.S. city infoboxes that should be addressed by the project as a whole before things get too out of hand. First up is the use of national, state, and county flags in the respective fields, which are decorative and are not outright prohibited by WP:INFOBOXFLAG, but discouraged.

Second is the listing of individual members of city councils under the government parameters, in particular for cities with council–manager governments (example here at Spokane, Washington). This seems to fall within the "not a directory", as such councilmember listings can be easily found on city websites and are basically a staff directory of people who are not notable enough for their own articles per WP:NPOL. These listings would also have to be updated fairly frequently, as councilmembers can be replaced outside of the election cycle.

I'd like to point to MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE, which encourages editors to "wherever possible, present information in short form, and exclude any unnecessary content". Too much information would burden readers and be an annoyance to editors. SounderBruce 07:37, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

I should also mention that a lot of infoboxes also go the extra mile in looking ugly thanks to their use of highway and transit icons for purely decorative purposes, along with listing airports and other amenities. I brought it up a while ago, but it wouldn't hurt to hash things out along with the rest of the infobox stuff. SounderBruce 04:50, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

I agree that council members should not be listed in the infobox. Mayor (yes), City Manager (yes), or other named top position (yes), otherwise no. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 13:28, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Recognizing that this is not limited to cities in the United States, Council–manager government and Mayor–council government are the two primary forms in the US (i.e. see St. Augustine, Florida is an unusual exception). The mayor is not necessarily (automatically) notable because in the Council–manager government the city manager heads the executive brand and the city council is the legislative branch but the mayor is simply one vote among several and chairs the meetings and makes ceremonial presentations and such. In the Mayor–council government, the mayor heads the executive branch and is typically full-time employee and the city council again is the legislative branch. The Council–manager government and Mayor–council government pages detail all this out so don't go by me, those are well-written.

I am sure I was unclear in my initial exchanges with User:SounderBruce, doing what I had done in other states until I hit Washington cities! He raises good points about avoiding lists. City websites are notoriously non-standard which makes city managers often hard to find even though they've been in job 30 years, such as the case currently in Torrance, California. The infobox on the city page for Fort Worth, Texas is an example of being nearly misleading, listing a mayor by name though it's Council–manager government (and city governments when non-partisan as they are in Texas should probably not list the party of the incumbent). The infobox for Anaheim, California lists the mayor, and US and state senators and assembly members, yet in the body of the article, the Government section identifies the city as Council–manager government and explains the mayor is "first among equals" yet fails to mention the city's top executive the city manager and still manages to list all the council members by name.

User:SounderBruce did a nice edit on Kennewick, Washington with an elegant reduction of naming elected representatives in the body of the article's Government section by focusing on what is relevant to that particular city. I'd agree non-city representatives don't belong in infoboxes at all, applying his logic, while we're at it.

I think infoboxes of Riverside, California and Abilene, Texas, and Addison, Texas gets it exactly right, identifying who the mayor on the council is but merely lists them first among equals; the City Manager is named so the Council and the Manager are both clear, appropriate to the form of government. If College Station, Texas didn't separate the mayor, I think the collapsible list feature (new to me but I'm open to start) might be a good compromise to avoid a long list of city council members. I just can't find an example quickly, but think Abilene, Texas with the council members shorted by using the collapsible list? My main point though it the mayor issue.

I have interest in championing (spend time editing) quality city infoboxes and government sections so I can help with the uniformity you all want and end the misinformation of listing mayors for Council–manager government cities. 1958publius (talk) 03:20, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Should U.S. cities have a box for electoral results?

I noticed some cities do and some don't have a box showing the results of past elections (mostly presidential and congressional). It's not in the U.S. city guideline but should it be included?—Naddruf (talk ~ contribs) 00:23, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

I would suggest that if the data is available, only the most recent one or two elections should be in the article, the rest should be in a subsidiary article. We tend to do this with UK Parliamentary constituencies (example: Rutland and Melton (UK Parliament constituency). All the best: Rich Farmbrough (the apparently calm and reasonable) 13:58, 26 January 2020 (UTC).

Locality categorization by historical subdivisions

FYI

 – Pointer to relevant discussion elsewhere.

Your input about the categorization of settlements is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#RfC: Locality categorization by historical subdivisions. Thank you, Renata (talk) 22:31, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Samalkha Population

The total population of Samalkha as stated in Wikipedia is 29974. However, I see that the total population under Samalkha is close to 3.1 lakhs. This needs to be checked Seshadrinathan Ramanathan (talk) 07:06, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

Neither of these figures correspond to the two in the article now. All the best: Rich Farmbrough (the apparently calm and reasonable) 18:14, 7 March 2020 (UTC).

RFC Discussion: Definition of Chinatown?

Please see the request for comment Talk:Chinatown,_Houston#Definition(s)_of_Chinatown_used/cited_by_the_article_Request_for_Comment_(RFC) regarding how Chinatown (the Southwest one) in Houston should be defined.

Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 01:13, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

GA reassessment of Flagstaff, Arizona

A Good Article reassessment has been opened for the article Flagstaff, Arizona, which your WikiProject might be interested in. Kingsif (talk) 01:54, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

A better citation link for U.S. Census data

The new QuickFacts tool for the Census Bureau uses a simpler URL scheme (e.g. census.gov/quickfacts/everettcitywashington for its basic data sets, which could be a suitable replacement for FactFinder links. A bot using Wayback Medic is currently replacing all of the FactFinder links with an ugly generic citation to the Census homepage, which is clearly unsuitable. I don't have the technical know-how, but could a bot be activated to replace the old FactFinder and new generic-link citations with the following:

<ref name="QuickFacts">{{cite web |title=QuickFacts: %ARTICLE NAME% |url=https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/%city_name%city%state_name% |publisher=[[United States Census Bureau]] |accessdate=April 12, 2020}}</ref>

I've already used this format at Everett, Washington, where it looks a lot better. SounderBruce 06:40, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Notice of reassessment

Bexley, Ohio, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ɱ (talk) 05:01, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

RfC relief maps in infoboxes

The question whether or not to use relief maps in the infobox for cities has come up often. There seems to be no set guidelines on these policies. For my part the relieft maps are more than a little distracting. Political maps properly show the placement of cities with the various political regions. While a relief map might be of use when commenting on the geography of a city and perhaps lay in that section. I would argue that political maps without relief should be the default. What is the actual policy on this though? It seems to be quite arbitrary on how and when these rules are applied. Thank you for any comment on this MoS for city infoboxes. Krazytea(talk) 14:00, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

• @Krazytea: can you provide some examples? I think it might be a case-by-case sort of thing. I could see a good argument for it in hilly cities like Rio de Janeiro, but it's obviously not needed for e.g. Chicago. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 21:37, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Off wiki controversy affecting an FA article of interest to this project

Please see Talk:Ann Arbor, Michigan#Change the main Ann Arbor city photo. John from Idegon (talk) 06:04, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Question on whether a Phnom Penh navigational template should be in "Fall of Phnom Penh"

Hi! Please see: Talk:Fall_of_Phnom_Penh in regards to a question on whether a Phnom Penh navigational template should be in "Fall of Phnom Penh" WhisperToMe (talk) 07:14, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Resources for expanding articles on individual cities

These resources look interesting. More reliable sources can probably be found for most of the communities profiles in these articles. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 23:30, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

• "The Weirdest Small Towns In The United States". Ranker. Retrieved 2020-05-20.
• "Monowi, Nebraska". Atlas Obscura. Retrieved 2020-05-20.
• "10 Eerie Ghost Towns and the Disasters That Made Them". Ranker. Retrieved 2020-05-20.

Neither Ranker nor Atlas Obscura are reliable sources. They are good lists pointing out cities that have quirks, but adding these facts to articles would require better sourcing (which is likely available for the more famous ones). SounderBruce 02:38, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

FYI: I started a relevant thread at WT:USA about census stuff on US location articles

See here. CJK09 (talk) 00:18, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Mysore

I have nominated Mysore for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. DrKay (talk) 10:01, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Merge Discussion Input requests

Proposed merger of Dêmqog, Ngari Prefecture to Demchok

Hi! There is a merger proposal here for the articles on the village(s) of Dêmqog, Ngari Prefecture and Demchok in the Sino-Indian border dispute. Any input is appreciated! — MarkH₂₁^talk 23:29, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Merger proposal

Dêmqog, Ngari Prefecture

An article of interest to the project—Dêmqog, Ngari Prefecture—has been proposed for merging with Demchok. Project members are invited to participate at the merger discussion. AnomalousAtom (talk) 10:21, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Discuss it >>>Here<<<. GenQuest ^{"Talk to Me"} 15:05, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Show Washington on map of Germantown, Maryland

I have just added the following to Talk: Germantown, Maryland:

Considering this sentence

Germantown is located approximately 25–30 miles (40–48 km) outside the U.S. capital of Washington, D.C. and is an important part of the Washington metropolitan area.

I think it would be valuable to add Washington, DC to the maps, at least to Location of Germantown in Montgomery County and the U.S. state of Maryland.

That article is not very active, so I am adding this notice to the Discussion sections of WikiProjects Maryland (which is currently rated semi-active) and Cities.

--16:11, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Abolish importance assessment for a core list and taskforces

I know this talkpage isn't very active, but I've thought that the nominal "importance" parameter of the WikiProject banner probably doesn't best serve the needs of this project. I say we get rid of it and have a "core" list of 50 cities, like they do at the Film and Biography WikiProjects, and divvy up the other cities into various taskforces, such as a National Capitals taskforce, an American settlements taskforce, etc. My list for the core is as follows, but can be changed.

• Alexandria
• Algiers
• Amsterdam
• Athens
• Baghdad
• Bangkok
• Beijing
• Berlin
• Buenos Aires
• Cairo
• Cape Town
• Chennai
• Chicago
• Damascus
• Delhi
• Dubai
• Hong Kong
• Istanbul
• Jakarta
• Jerusalem
• Johannesburg
• Karachi
• Kuala Lumpur
• Lagos
• Lisbon
• London
• Los Angeles
• Macau
• Madrid
• Manila
• Mecca
• Melbourne
• Mexico City
• Moscow
• Mumbai
• Nairobi
• New York City
• Paris
• Rio de Janeiro
• Rome
• Saint Petersburg
• San Francisco
• São Paulo
• Seoul
• Shanghai
• Singapore
• Sydney
• Taipei
• Tokyo
• Washington, D.C.

Let me know what you think! – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 22:30, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Some of these cities are the centers of metropolitan areas, like, for example, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California/Los Angeles area task force, so their task forces should reflect that fact. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 03:41, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Given that taskforces can be associated with multiple WikiProjects, I'm fine with that. Do note that several cities on the list have their own WikiProjects, so I don't think they'll need to be taskforced here. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 13:49, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

On second thought, given that the contents of the core list can change and that several cities have their own full-fledged WikiProjects (not to mention the very many cities that have either, making programming the banner difficult), I oppose specific-city taskforces in this WikiProject, although they can exist in others. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 00:48, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

A move discussion requires your attention

Talk:Peć#Requested move 18 August 2020 is a move discussion which has seen a lot of editors with very few edits in English wikipedia who appear to !vote. Regardless of the outcome of that discussion, it needs to be the product of the wikipedia community, not the result of any off-wiki activity as the editing patterns indicate. The only way that can be ensured is if the community is active in that discussion. Regardless of what you may eventually think about the move, please take a few minutes to participate. The more involved we are, the better our project becomes. Thank you :) --Maleschreiber (talk) 14:07, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Relisted move discussion requires attention

Talk:Mališevo#Requested move 8 August 2020 is a discussion about the article title of a town in Kosovo. It has been relisted and new participation would be welcome in the discussion.--Maleschreiber (talk) 21:06, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Need a few more eyes at Mecca

Can we get a few eyes over at Mecca...have GA review going on by two new high school editors.--Moxy 🍁 03:50, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

List of short place names

This appears to only accept latin-letter place names. There should be a complementary list for non-Latin place names that are short. (non-ideographic/logographic/syllabic scripts; ie. in Korean it would be two letters and not two characters (multiple letters per syllabic character) for a short "2" name) -- 65.94.170.98 (talk) 13:10, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

@65.94.170.98: You can add the place to the list if its romanization has 1 or 2 letters. —Naddruf (talk ~ contribs) 18:22, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

I was referring to having a second list for places whose native name is short (ie. not romanized) -- 65.94.170.98 (talk) 07:53, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

General consensus to justify inclusion of "notable people" into city articles

In Lake Oswego, Oregon, I was finding "notable" (defined as "having Wikipedia article" in hidden comment) people such as someone who happened to go to high school there. What is the general consensus of Cities Project as guidelines for justifying inclusion of someone into articles about cities? One such example is Michael Jones (entrepreneur), who was a former Myspace CEO who went to high school in Lake Oswego. Should a person like such should be added to the city article where the high school is located?

The hidden comment (before I edited out) in the page read:

"· Only people who already have a Wikipedia article may appear here. This establishes notability. · The biographical article must mention how they are associated with L.O., whether born, raised, or residing. · The fact of their association should have a reliable source cited in this article. · Alphabetical by last name please"

Is this consistent with the general project wide or even broader consensus?

Graywalls (talk) 10:40, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Move discussion

Hello, everybody. Talk:Vučitrn#Requested move 20 August 2020 is a move discussion that has been relisted but hasn't seen much activity since then. Regardless of what you may eventually think about the move, please take a few minutes to participate. Involvement of the community in Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cities#A move discussion requires your attention enriched the discussion and more of the same is needed in the current discussion. Thank you.--Maleschreiber (talk) 17:24, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Notable people

The present definition is someone who has a Wikipedia page and born and/or lives in the locality. A discussion from 10 years ago Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cities/US_Guideline/Archive_2#Are_notable_people_more_than_residence? brings up a good point that long term community members and others who had a significant influence within the city should be included. However, how should we deal with professional athletes and such who are notable for their sports who lived in the subject city for some years or attended high school (but was not born in that city) but not for something tied to the community? Also, Wikipedia:WikiProject_Cities/US_Guideline doesn't line up. Since local consensus can not override a wider consensus, then do we apply the more stringent of the two when the higher consensus (Project Cities wide vs Project Cities/US) is more stringent? The US Cities say having Wikipedia page isn't mandatory. Graywalls (talk) 18:54, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia guidelines contradict each other all the time. WP:CCSG is unique as well. In my experience, US Cities has a much wider consensus; its take page is enormous. The first sentence of WP:CITSTRUCT acknowledges these differences: "This reference is a supplement to specific guidelines on writing about U.K. cities and towns, U.S. cities, Canadian cities, Philippine cities and municipalities, and Indian cities. It does not replace those, but amalgamates the information in order to serve as advice for writing about settlements not in those geographic regions." Magnolia677 (talk) 19:22, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

US Cities

I posted the discussion over there and directed it here since I already started it here. It would make sense for busier US cities pages to have LESS lenient criteria to avoid the proliferation of run of the mill people from piling up into the city's article or "list of people from locality" page. The guidelines in WPC is include only those with Wiki page, born and/or current resident of locale. The WP USC doesn't require a WP entry; but that the person meets WP:GNG if a page was to be created. The US Cities project guidelines say "notable individuals that were born, or lived for a significant amount of time". I can see it makes sense for a non-native, notable politician of a city to be included in that city's page even after they move away; however what about various notable athletes whose only connection seems to be attending high school in a particular city? I wouldn't call moving from a different place and going to high school in that city "significant amount of time", but let's see what the project consensus is Graywalls (talk) 21:45, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

In practice, names entered on the US list without an article are quickly nuked. Magnolia677 (talk) 21:48, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

And I do a great deal of that nuking....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 22:01, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

What about the threshold level of connection for people that do have article to remain in there? Graywalls (talk) 22:03, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Let's look at Holly Madison. In which locality articles is it appropriate for her to exist under "notable people" section? Born in Astoria, Oregon , moved to Craig, Alaska at two, then to Prince of Wales Island (Alaska), then St. Helens, Oregon Attended Portland State University for two years , moved to Los Angeles and attended Loyola Marymount UniversityGraywalls (talk) 22:12, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

The consensus has always been that working or going to school in Foo doesn't automatically make a person from Foo. Born in Foo yes, Born near Foo, no. (I'm a published author if I ever got notable enough for a WP article, I'd hate to see near used as a categorizing factor. I've lived across the street or less than a two block walk from other communities in my lifetime. Don't get me started on all the zip codes I've lived in too...) I see no reason to change it....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 23:04, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

She's in the locality page of every one of those places, except Los Angeles. With small towns wanting to associate with the famous, the practice of adding notable people that have minimal connection with the city needs to be put under control. If someone was born in first locality, then moved to a second locality as an infant and lived in the second city for 20 years, then move somewhere else again and become notable, then, it's reasonable to designated the second town as "home" but certainly not in the "notable people" in all three locality. Graywalls (talk) 23:42, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

With the closure of many rural hospitals and the consolidation of specialities in urban/suburban centers, some cities will hardly have any people born in the them in the foreseeable future. Both my daughter and grandson do not have a connection to the city of their birth where there was a hospital but they would have a notable connection to where they lived most of their young life. It seems that the "birth city" is becoming more and more meaningless in the US. I noticed articles on sports figures talk about their hometown. People, who from a young age lived in a town, should be listed there even though they were born in the nearby community with a hospital. The college years does not appear to be an issue as many college towns specifically mention that Alumni should be listed in the college only unless there was a notable connection to the community. Although much of this is subjective, actual notability with a community should be verified with reliable sources describing their connection to the community and not just a birth record or other simple record. Death is similar: the Woodland Hills, Los Angeles article has the following notice: The Motion Picture & Television Country House and Hospital, a private retirement, nursing care and acute-care hospital facility is reserved for industry professionals. The section includes some people who lived and/or died there, among other residents. Fettlemap (talk) 04:03, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Common sense can be applied here. The first home which the person lives in after returning from the hospital can reasonably be called the origin for practical purposes. It's what we have going on with Holly Madison we want to avoid. If a person was born in an obscure community, but doesn't remain in that community, then what we don't want happening is those people being added to "notable people from..." for that obscure community. Graywalls (talk) 08:38, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Holly Madison

The "general" cities guidelines would keep her relevant only in Astroria. But with the US rules, it's a bit ambiguous and she's in every single one of the below. Which place(s) should see be listed in?

• Birth to 2: Astoria, Oregon
• 2- end of elementary school: Craig, Alaska, on Prince of Wales Island
• Start of Middle School to end of high school: St. Helens, Oregon, graduating from St. Helens High School

Graywalls (talk) 09:50, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

MoS and general input for Slab City, California

I am looking for comments on MoS and general contents on Slab City, California that I have been working on for a while. Thank you. Graywalls (talk) 02:39, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

FAR for Tulsa

I have nominated Tulsa, Oklahoma for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. (t · c) buidhe 00:42, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Rova of Antananarivo featured article review

I have nominated Rova of Antananarivo for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. (t · c) buidhe 02:39, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

FAR for Istanbul

I have nominated Istanbul for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. (t · c) buidhe 04:09, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

El Hatillo Municipality FAR

I have nominated El Hatillo Municipality for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:47, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

FAR notice

I have nominated Westgate-on-Sea for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm _Bacon 06:23, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

COVID-19

Hello. Can anyone here tell me where to put a section on the effects of the pandemic on a city? I decided on Economy for Minneapolis because it makes an immediate difference to survivors. -SusanLesch (talk) 20:44, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_COVID-19#Effects_of_COVID-19_pandemic_on_a_city,_state_or_country is the dispostion in case anyone cares. -SusanLesch (talk) 23:12, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Invitation to US Housing Edit-a-thon

Please join us on 13 December 2020, 12:00-14:00 EST, as we update and improve articles in Wikipedia related to housing in the United States of America. Sign up here. -- M2545 (talk) 11:27, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

RFC on whether Ottoman capital city should be referred to as "Constantinople" or "Istanbul"

Please see this request for comment on whether Ottoman capital city should be referred to as "Constantinople" or "Istanbul": Talk:History_of_Istanbul#Should_the_name_"Istanbul"_be_used_for_the_Ottoman_city_instead_of_"Constantinople"? WhisperToMe (talk) 15:08, 11 December 2020 (UTC)