Talk:Billings, Montana

Billings, Montana is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
November 12, 2005	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
January 7, 2006	Featured article candidate	Not promoted

Current status: Former featured article candidate

Montana: Montana Cities High‑importance

	Montana portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Montana, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Montana on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MontanaWikipedia:WikiProject MontanaTemplate:WikiProject MontanaMontana
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Montana cities task force.

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1

Archive 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 3 sections are present.

Article is incredibly out of date

First of all, since I lived around Billings, I have never heard of any Cheyenne or Crow name for Billings. It was made up by somebody on here as is almost invariably the case often with Wikipedia articles about place names. It may be PC correct, it’s factually wrong. Who is the person that puts these names together anyway? . I cannot stand it when someone does something anonymously with no back up for what they’re doing. Where is the footnoting to justify the Cheyenne and Crow names for Billings?

By the way, I don’t know the Cheyenne name for themselves, except possibly, but I do know the name Crow is wrong. “Absaroka “ comes much closer to the name they call themselves than Crow , which was a fake name in the first place. The name for this tribe is closer to “people of the raven,” not a crow.

Furthermore, this mention of Lockwood is 20 years out of date. Look at the article: it talks about its growth as of 2010. Again, somebody needs to update this, but I don’t feel like doing it. I hope somebody tackles this task to bring the article up-to-date.

Furthermore, I don’t understand why allnost every Wiki of articles about cities and counties discuss what their census data wise as far back as 20 years ago, or even 10 years ago. Who cares about what Billings’ demographic profile was in 2000?

I’m trying to be constructive and what I’m saying. I admire the attempt by people to write objective articles, but it’s obvious this one needs a lot of work, if only to bring the demographic data up-to-date. How about somebody checking out the 2020 census data and using it? Someone who’s crazy about Montana. Thanks a lot. 63.155.60.223 (talk) 12:14, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You complain about being out of date and then say, "somebody needs to update this, but I don’t feel like doing it". Nice. Thank for your input, we'll take it under advisement. Cheers. --Malerooster (talk) 16:59, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As for the Crow and Cheyenne names, you probably haven't heard the names because you're presumably not a member of a community that speaks Crow or Cheyenne. There are sources for these names posted, and their history dates back to the early days of Billings' settlement. Perhaps you're unaware, but plenty of people in this region learn local Indigenous languages first and speak English as a second language. They will quite possibly learn these names before they learn Billings. Your section here reads more as whinging than "trying to be constructive", to be quite frank. Saven.ganders (talk) 01:38, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

When Billings Stood Up to Hate

I was thinking it would be nice to include this in the entry. Basically, in 1993, many people went out of their way to fight anti-semitism and other ethnic hatred.

This is discussed in more detail here: https://www.jta.org/2008/01/22/united-states/billings-15-years-after-menorah-incident

Just thought it would be nice to add a sentence or two, nothing more. (I just visited Billings and liked it very much, which is why I thought of this). Minjitthemidget (talk) 01:08, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Billings' climate box

There is a bit of an anomaly in the first climate box on this page, specifically in the "average precipitation days" row (the tenth row with data). Normally (you can check climate boxes for other major cities) the final entry of that row (in the "year" column) represents the total number of days with precipitation that the city receives in a year. It is the sum of all the days of precipitation in all twelve months.

The issue here is that the numbers don't add up. If you add the number of days of precipitation in January, February, etc. all the way through December, you get 96.9, NOT the value of 56.9 that is listed. The total number of days with snowfall in one year, 38.8 (one row down), virtually makes up this difference. This makes me think that someone changed the value for number of days with precipitation (which should be 96.9) by subtracting the number of days with snowfall, leading us to the current value, give or take a day. This treats snowfall as separate from precipitation, which is incorrect, since snowfall is a type of precipitation.

The climate charts for all other major cities do not do this. The number of days with precipitation always adds up to the correct number for the yearly value. I am just pointing this out because I might be missing something, but I do think it is wrong. 2600:6C50:18F0:ADC0:B12B:7E30:123:A625 (talk) 06:11, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]