Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Main page Talk Embassy Requested
Articles
Members Portal Recognized
content
To do Help
Welcome to the discussion page of WikiProject United States

Positions on Jerusalem

I added the WikiProject's template to the talk page of Positions on Jerusalem but it was removed. I think that it's on the scope of the project because it has two sections, "United States" and "United States Embassy", related to the United States. Do you think that it should be re-added?

State legislators in town/city infoboxes

I propose that the name of the state legislator representing the city/town in question should be included in the infobox, next to where the city/town's mayor would be listed. Please share your thoughts on this.

Jeff Fager CBS News Scandal.

https://www.mediaite.com/online/new-sexual-misconduct-allegations-against-60-minutes-exec-jeff-fager-he-was-on-a-power-trip/

Apparently more people came forward on Him at the same time as the Les Moonves scandal came into play at CBS as of September 2018.


https://wcbs880.radio.com/articles/cbs-ceo-les-moonves-step-down-amid-sexual-misconduct-probe

https://www.businessinsider.com/les-moonves-6-more-women-accuse-cbs-chairman-sexual-misconduct-2018-9


https://www.cbsnews.com/news/leslie-moonves-six-more-women-accuse-cbs-ceo-of-sexual-assault-or-harassment/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:640:C600:8270:BCDA:FB96:296B:21B2 (talk) 21:29, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Mark Judge (writer) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mark Judge (writer) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Judge (writer) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Sagecandor (talk) 02:40, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

RfC on Featured Article nomination

I have nominated William Matthews (priest) for Featured Article status, and it is currently under review here. The article failed once before for failure to generate enough comments. I believe it is very close to FA, and meets all the criteria. Any further input would be greatly appreciated. Ergo Sum 04:54, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

RfC on cleanup at Template:Infobox U.S. federal court

Please see the discussion here on whether to condense and reform many parameters. Ergo Sum 04:38, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

The categories "People by town in (state)" versus "People by city in (state)" are confusing

At least a few states have municipalities in two completely disjoint categories, one for towns and one for cities. These are technically container categories, because each category contains a list of categories (one for each town or city) and no individual pages.

I found this extremely confusing at first. I can see that "People by populated place in (state)" often exists (or perhaps always exists), but it is not just a union of the "towns" and "cities" categories, it also has "census designated places" and boroughs within cities (like Manhattan within New York City) and neighborhoods within boroughs within cities (like Greenwich Village within Manhattan within New York City).

I'm not saying we should change the tree structure at all, I think having a category of categories for all "populated places" is good, and I think having totally disjoint categories of categories for towns and cities is fine, but I probably wouldn't have started that way, but we already have it.

Here is what I propose:

Near the top of the "People by town in (State)", there should be a big link to the related "People by city in (State)", and a note that the state in question contains both towns and cities, and this one page doesn't have all the municipalities in the state.

Not only is the link not big, and not at the top, the link is nowhere. I had to think of a specific "town" that I thought was missing from a state, look up that "town", confirm that it is in the state I thought, and then realize it is a city. Then all the pieces fell into place.

If someone shows up in Nebraska and asks themself, "Hmm, I wonder what famous people are from Nebraska", Wikipedia should have that ready to go for both cities and towns. I realize there is a page for the whole state, but even the smaller states have very big lists, and there is no feature to sort by how awesome the people are (nor could this feature ever be implemented), so the temptation to drill down by town or city is probably the first thing that an aimless wanderer will try.

I think a major use of these category pages is when someone just got a job offer in Delaware, they have never been to Delaware, it is 4 AM, and they want to figure out "what's up with Delaware?" The question is purposefully vague, and Wikipedia is the best possible place to answer these questions. "You don't know what you're looking for, but Wikipedia knows exactly what we have, and here it is."

(I chose Nebraska and Delaware randomly because they are relatively small in population, but not the smallest (Wyoming), and because I get a general sense that people do not know "what is up with" those two states. Although looking at the list sorted by population, I think that is just true in general for the least populous states.) Fluoborate (talk) 08:45, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

I agree with this! Can we have a script or bot do this so the links don't have to be added manually though? Thanks for bringing this up! –Daybeers (talk) 01:18, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

McAfee 2020 campaign

See Talk:John McAfee#Media attention and false news (permalink). --Krinkle (talk) 04:29, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Naming of articles about transportation accidents and incidents in the United States

At Talk:2018 Schoharie, New York limousine crash there is a discussion ongoing regarding the article naming, one aspect of which is about whether or not to include the state name or not. There are currently no guidelines or conventions on this that either myself or user:Daniel Case have found. There is no consistency in the naming of articles, for example:

I feel it would be beneficial to have a naming convention for these articles and so I propose the following:

  • Articles about transportation accidents and incidents in the United States should normally include the name of the state in the title, except:

Comments are invited below. I will leave notes inviting comments here from editors at the related WikiProjects I know of (WP:TRAINS, WP:DISASTERMGT, WP:TRANSPORT, WP:AVIATION), but obviously feel free to invite others I'm not aware of/have forgotten. Thryduulf (talk) 00:47, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

The state name should only be added where disambiguation is required, that is, where there are multiple places with the same name. For example, there are multiple Chatsworths and Garrisons in the US, so the relevant state name should be included. Schoharie, however, is unique, so the state name is unnecessary. WWGB (talk) 01:14, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
Well, if we adopt guidelines for this sort of thing, we should:
  • Extend them to all events whose article title would use a comma-separated toponym, regardless of country, as a descriptor, not just transportation accidents/incidents (and I would qualify that as "ground transportation accidents/incidents", since we use flight identifiers for most aviation incidents (at least commercial ones) and the waterbody or vessel name for navigation accidents)
  • Also settle the question, my real question, of whether a comma is required after the name of the state in a title when the location is used as a descriptor. I am leaning towards no, because we don't generally use commas after modifiers, but there might be others who think differently.
  • Decide whether the above two issues are also applicable to events that are described by MDY dates of occurrence. We won't always have it as easy as where we could eventually take "2001" out of the title of September 11 attacks and all other articles titled that way since everyone knows which September 11 we're talking about.
Honestly, since as suggested above I believe this issue extends beyond the naming of articles about transportation accidents, we should really be discussing it at the MOS talk pages. Daniel Case (talk) 02:18, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
I just followed the link from the limo crash talk page, figuring it went all the way to the top. Noticed afterward we're technically only talking about American transportation. My advice applies equally to wherever this general discussion is likely to wind up. As for your second comma dilemma, yes, generally leave it out; same as when referring to "the October 19, 2005 episode of Such and Such". InedibleHulk (talk) 02:33, October 11, 2018 (UTC)
I figured that transportation accidents was a broad enough scope as they mostly tend to be named similarly in relation to a place. Other incidents are less predictable (e.g. mass shootings tend to get named for more precise locations such as institutions or neighbourhoods), once agreement is reached on either including it always, never or in defined circumstances it can be expanded if desired. I decided to limit the discussion to places in the US because the "comma convention" of geographical location naming is not applicable worldwide so the question of whether to include the state name in the title isn't relevant to most places outside the US. The guideline agreed here (whatever it is) can be applied to other places where it makes sense if people want it to (assuming consensus of relevant editors/projects) but it wont make sense everywhere (e.g. in the UK). I don't have any opinion about the number of commas and that's slightly beside the point about whether to include the state name or not. Thryduulf (talk) 12:01, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  • In regards to adding state names, in the case of the Schoharie limo crash, I'm not sure people are going to remember the name of the small town the crash happened in it, just that it was in New York State. Also, do we not care about the year? I feel like the title is incomplete without it, but I could be convinced otherwise. :) I do strongly believe this needs to be brought up in the MOS talk pages as proposed above. –Daybeers (talk) 03:48, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
Whether people remember anything we tell them in any part of any article is ultimately out of our hands. But by calling it the Schoharie limousine crash in big bold letters upfront, they're more likely to leave permanently (and correctly) associating the limousine crash with Schoharie, rather than loosely tying it to a state or year their minds have already linked to a mish-mash of memorable and forgettable things. "Schoharie" is strange and new, thus virgin and fertile, just like "Kyoto", "Nuremberg" or "Jonestown" were, before they grew into autocompleting root words.
And yeah, we care about the year. It's just not used by any reliable sources (like most events), so flatly fails WP:COMMONNAME. "Only" suitable for the infobox, lead, categories and body. Without the year, "Schoharie, New York, limousine crash" is used by one single source. "New York limousine crash" is pretty much the only viable alternative here, and is one letter more concise but obviously less precise. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:47, October 11, 2018 (UTC)
This is discussion is not specifically about the limo crash - it's about all (ground) transportation accidents in the US and it's about establishing consistency for all such accidents that occur outside the ~30 major cities listed at WP:USPLACE. Whether or not to include the year is entirely independent of whether or not the state name should be included. Thryduulf (talk) 12:01, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Any other thoughts on this? Daybeers (talk) 19:01, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Speaking as someone from outside the USA, I find it is useful to include the state as a disambigator as it give some indication of roughly where the incident was. I would suggest that if the location is not disambiguated on its Wikipedia page, the there is no need to disambiguate in the title. Also, there is probably less need to disambiguate for State Capitals, but this should not be a hard and fast rule. Mjroots (talk) 10:14, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

    • State capitals vary in their significance - Atlanta is the largest city in Georgia and internationally known, Augusta is only the 9th most populous city in Maine, and I'd say that Augusta, Georgia is likely significantly better known outside the USA. I think therefore it's not a great criterion by which to judge the need for disambiguation or not. Thryduulf (talk) 12:33, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_United_States&oldid=864151344"
This content was retrieved from Wikipedia : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_United_States
This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article "Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States"; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA