Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities/Archive 23

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 20Archive 21Archive 22Archive 23

Good article reassessment for Evanton

Evanton has been nominated for a 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. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 03:47, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Scarborough, Ontario

Scarborough, Ontario has been nominated for a 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. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:35, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Information on poverty, slums and pollution missing on purpose?

I was working on the article on Dhaka today and noticed that it had almost no information at all about problematic aspects of the city. Sure, traffic congestion was mentioned. But there was hardly anything about the fact that about 30% of Dhaka residents live in slums (!!), that access to water and sanitation is very poor for those people, that the city rivers are very polluted, that low-income areas are often affected by flooding (made worse from climate change). I've added a bit of that now.

Also, almost all of the photos showed a glitzy, shining metropolis, nice buildings and so forth but not a balanced picture of what the city really looks like. So I am just wondering: was that on purpose? Is there perhaps even a kind of policy to show cities of the Global South in their best possible light?

I agree that it would be wrong to let all the problematic aspects dominate a city article on Dhaka totally but to sweep them all under the carpet can't be right either. Who are the people editing this article mostly - is it Global North editors, travel agencies, historians or wealthy people from Dhaka who have little contact with the more difficult sides of their city? Two example publications that I used today are here and here.

More info is on the talk page of the Dhaka article but I came here to ask if there is perhaps a kind of policy or quiet consensus about how problem aspects of cities in developing countries should be reflected in their Wikipedia articles. This would also apply to e.g. Nairobi, Delhi. Pinging User:Sadads in case he'd like to comment. EMsmile (talk) 18:31, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Dhaka#Demographics looks fine, because the slum topic is a small fraction of the overall size of the article. Maybe renamed the section "People living in slums" to just "Slums"??? • Sbmeirow • Talk • 00:03, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
This topic is fine as long as there isn't a high percentage of content on this subject matter compared to the overall size of the article. We need to ensure that editors don't abuse this topic in a way that promotes racist or bigoted views. This is related to the opposite topic... afluent rich communities... it is generally frown upon to use lots of overly positive fluffy wording for such communities, in the same way should minimize the use of negative or offsensive terms for poor communities. In general, should stick to facts as much as possible, and minimize personal commentary. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 00:00, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Northallerton

Northallerton has been nominated for a 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. Hog Farm Talk 02:22, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi everyone. I invite you all to participate in the discussion on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Infoboxes#City related articles infoboxes to come to a common interpretation about the infobox image format for the city related articles. It would be of a great help. 456legendtalk 02:24, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Minneapolis has an RfC

Minneapolis, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has an RfC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. -SusanLesch (talk) 02:35, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Historical population figures

Has there been any discussion about whether village and town articles should include historical population data? I think it is absurd for an article about a village with a population of 500 to include a lengthy table of historical population figures. Obviously the current population should be mentioned, but I don't see any general interest in changes in populations over time in the vast majority of articles. 167.98.155.153 (talk) 16:04, 23 March 2024 (UTC) Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Best known for IP

It's not any more absurd than high percentages of UK village/hamlet articles not having any population data. 98.164.0.128 (talk) 16:50, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not like a telephone directory. A telephone directory shows current information only. But Wikipedia is (or aspires to be) an encyclopaedia, so past information is worth retaining. If it is worth having articles on places like Hovingham, then it is worth recording that the population of Hovingham in the past was nearly double what it is now - and being specific and quoting dates and numbers makes it verifiable. So yes, tables of historical population figures are a good thing, providing that they can be supported by sources.-- Toddy1 (talk) 17:11, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
The specific article you mention does not contain a table of historical population. It certainly can be worth mentioning significant changes to populations, but consider a specific case: given that UK census data from 1841 onwards can be obtained, should the article for every town and village in England contain a table showing its population at every census? I see absolutely no value in that. I see it as counter to the very idea of an encyclopaedia, which is not a repository of data, facts or figures, but a body of work which explains and provides context to data, facts and figures. A couple of relevant excerpts from policies:
If you think there a policies or guidelines which would support the idea of lengthy tables of population data as encyclopaedic, I'd be interested to know which ones they are. 167.98.155.153 (talk) 16:08, 24 March 2024 (UTC) Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Best known for IP

Rural settlements & rural localities?

Should "rural settlements/localities" categories (e.g. Category:Rural settlements in Ukraine / Category:Rural localities in Russia) and subordinate cats & articles be tagged with {{WP Cities}}, or are they too small?   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  21:13, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Since they are significant enough to have articles written about them, and numerous enough to be categorized, I think they meet the spirit of WP:WikiProject Cities#Scope, even though they're not explicitly mentioned.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  14:44, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:İskenderun#Requested move 22 April 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:İskenderun#Requested move 22 April 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 05:50, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Manpool#Requested move 2 May 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Manpool#Requested move 2 May 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 19:11, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

State of city-oriented WikiProjects

While working on bringing Wikipedia:WikiProject Louisville back to fully active status, I've noticed that many other city-oriented WikiProjects, particularly in the US, have become largely inactive. And this is despite all kinds of work left to do (in my project alone, I can attest to this). Is this a matter of there being much fewer active Wikipedians in general, or is it something else? At any rate, maybe there should be some effort to reawaken these projects. Stefen Towers among the rest! Gab • Gruntwerk 21:51, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Wikiprojects in general are not very active, it's a common problem no-one has really found a solution to (assuming one is desired). CMD (talk) 01:44, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
I think this would be akin to desiring getting more editors involved generally, and I definitely desire that. That's where it seems the problem lies. I haven't witnessed any particular antipathy to WikiProjects. We just have much fewer active editors. Stefen Towers among the rest! Gab • Gruntwerk 00:16, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
I honestly think that some city-oriented WikiProjects should be a task force under this if they are not alive. Some people here may be able to help. Arhan D (talk) 20:13, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Póvoa de Varzim

Póvoa de Varzim has been nominated for a 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. Z1720 (talk) 13:38, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Macau#Requested move 24 June 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Macau#Requested move 24 June 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Remsense诉 14:27, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Additional input about "Municipal pop." used on Template:Largest cities

Hi there, I'm engaged in a discussion at Template talk:Largest cities regarding the usage of the adjective "Municipal" in that template, and I'm confident editors here have had that sort of discussion about defining "city" before. I'd love if we could get some addition input from any experts that watch this WikiProject. Thanks! -- Patrick Neil, oѺ∞/Talk 14:33, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Davenport, Iowa

Davenport, Iowa has been nominated for a 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. Z1720 (talk) 20:06, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

I regrouped the fields in the infobox. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 21:49, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

RfC on consistent naming of German municipal subdivisions

I have requested input on a proposal to stick to a consistent naming schema for first-, second-, and (where applicable) informal third-level subdivisions in German cities. If you would like to participate in the discussion, please add your comments on the RfC subpage. Thank you! --Newbiepedian (talk · C · X! · L) 17:09, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for York

York has been nominated for a 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. Z1720 (talk) 18:03, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Ascalon#Requested move 20 July 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Ascalon#Requested move 20 July 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. --Bolter21 (talk to me) 11:13, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Nusantara (city)#Requested move 16 July 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Nusantara (city)#Requested move 16 July 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. RodRabelo7 (talk) 16:12, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Alamogordo, New Mexico

Alamogordo, New Mexico has been nominated for a 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. Z1720 (talk) 21:09, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

FAR for Ann Arbor, Michigan

I have nominated Ann Arbor, Michigan 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. Z1720 (talk) 16:14, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

User changing settlement-type to "Capital city"

An IP user, User:35.151.61.31, has been changing the settlement type of a number of capitals to "Capital city". Two of these edits were made through a registered account, User:ThaGreenlander. I've explained to them on the talk page of the registered user that I don't believe this is correct because the fact that a geographical entity serves as the capital of a greater entity is a separate matter from the classification of the entity itself. It occurred to me that I ought to bring this to the attention of this WikiProject for feedback and consensus on the proper use of the settlement field in these cases. Largoplazo (talk) 23:07, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Been almost a week editor simply WP:NOTHERE still at it dispite being ask to give input. Have reverted Canadian related articles with edit summary wrong use of parameter ......type of city etc not political standing Template:Infobox settlement - settlement_type - such as Town, Village, City, Borough etc. . That had ..hidden note - Consensus see: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ontario/Archive 1#City infoboxes: "tier" or "conventional" municipal statuses (or both)? Can we get a bot to revert the rest? and a short block to get their attention ?Moxy🍁 06:08, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#‎User changing settlement-type to "Capital city"

Good article reassessment for Lincolnshire, Illinois

Lincolnshire, Illinois has been nominated for a 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. Z1720 (talk) 15:32, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Galveston, Texas

Galveston, Texas has been nominated for a 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. Z1720 (talk) 13:57, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Key Biscayne

Key Biscayne has been nominated for a 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. Z1720 (talk) 14:45, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cities/Archive_23&oldid=1260557727"