User talk:SounderBruce/Archive 41

This is an archive of past discussions with SounderBruce. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

< Archive 40

Archive 41

Archive 42>

All Pages:

1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10 - 11 - 12 - 13 - 14 - 15 - 16 - 17 - 18 - 19 - 20 - 21 - 22 - 23 - 24 - 25 - 26 - 27 - 28 - 29 - 30 - 31 - 32 - 33 - 34 - 35 - 36 - 37 - 38 - 39 - 40 - 41 - 42 - 43 - 44 - ... (up to 100)

WikiCup 2022 November newsletter

The 2022 WikiCup has drawn to a close with the final round going down to the wire. The 2022 champion is

Lee Vilenski (1752 points), who won in 2020 and was runner up in both 2019 and last year. In the final round he achieved 3 FAs and 15 GAs, mostly on cue sports. He was closely followed by
Bloom6132 (1732), who specialised in "In the news" items and DYKs, and who has reached the final round of the Cup for the past three years. Next was
BennyOnTheLoose (1238), another cue sports enthusiast, also interested in songs, followed by
Muboshgu (1082), an "In the news" contributor, a seasoned contestant who first took part in the Cup ten years ago. Other finalists were
Sammi Brie (930), who scored with a featured article, good articles and DYKs on TV and radio stations,
Kavyansh.Singh (370), who created various articles on famous Americans, including an FA on Louis H. Bean, famed for his prediction of election outcomes. Next was
PCN02WPS (292), who scored with good articles and DYKs on sporting and other topics and
Z1720 (25) who had DYKs on various topics including historic Canadians.

During the WikiCup, contestants achieved 37 featured articles, 349 good articles, 360 featured article reviews, 683 good article reviews and 480 In the news items, so Wikipedia has benefited greatly from the activities of WikiCup competitors. Well done everyone! All those who reached the final round will receive awards and the following special awards will be made, based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, these prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round, or the overall leader in this field.

Lee Vilenski wins the featured article prize, for a total of 6 FAs during the course of the competition and 3 in the final round.
Kavyansh.Singh wins the featured list prize, for 3 FLs in round 2.
Adam Cuerden wins the featured picture prize, for 39 FPs during the competition.
Z1720 wins the featured article reviewer prize, for 35 FARs in round 4.
Epicgenius wins the good article prize, for 32 GAs in round 1.
SounderBruce wins the featured topic prize, for 4 FT articles in round 1.
Lee Vilenski wins the good topic prize, for 34 GT articles in round 5.
Sammi Brie wins the good article reviewer prize, for 71 GARs overall.
Sammi Brie wins the Did you know prize, for 30 DYKs in round 3 and 106 overall.
Bloom6132 wins the In the news prize, for 106 ITNs in round 5 and 289 overall.

Next year's competition will begin on 1 January and possible changes to the rules and scoring are being discussed on the discussion page. You are invited to sign up to take part in the contest; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to have a good turnout for the 2023 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners and finalists, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:28, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MLS Cup 2022

Super

Hi,

Can you improve the color of the Philadelphia team shorts? They played in yellow shorts (I was watching the match on TV). I wanted to improve myself, but I can't ...

Thank you greetings Artur Realista74 (talk) 18:03, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Realista74: Fixed them by swapping out the shorts pattern part of the template. In the future, please use edit summaries when making changes; we'd be able to help. Sounder Bruce 23:40, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup awards

Congratulations on this award. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:44, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Phở Bắc

Hello! Your submission of Phở Bắc at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Adog (Talk・Cont) 06:33, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fifteenth anniversary on Wikipedia!

Invitation to join the Fifteen Year Society

Dear SounderBruce/Archive 41,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Fifteen Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for fifteen years or more.

Best regards, Chris Troutman (talk) 16:00, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for MLS Cup 2022

On 14 November 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article MLS Cup 2022, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the most valuable player of MLS Cup 2022, John McCarthy, only played once in the regular season? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/MLS Cup 2022. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, MLS Cup 2022), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Vanamonde93 (talk) 00:02, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation of the city.

I removed the incorrect pronunciation of the city of Boise for the same reason other Wikipedia pages do not include their respective, and perhaps understandable, mispronunciations. For example, "Arkansas," and, "Mackinac Island." The mispronunciation of Boise is less understandable, and just as incorrect.

If I should have explained it the first time, then that's on me. Friarbax (talk) 01:29, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Friarbax: Given that reliable sources also use the other pronunciation, and there isn't a consensus on which is correct, both should stay. It's not unusual for articles to have multiple pronunciations in their lead, such as Toronto and Chicago. Removal requires consensus, so start a talk page discussion per the BRD cycle. Sounder Bruce 01:35, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Very well. BRD sounds good. Friarbax (talk) 01:59, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Seattle Southside Links

Hey there! I'm the user who added links to the Seattle Southside page for the city pages for Tukwila, SeaTac, and Des Moines. I'm discussing here since there are three different pages in question, so it wouldn't make sense to repeat the talk across three pages. I wanted to reach out to make sure we don't go back and forth on edits on these three pages and can instead find a solution that makes sense for both of us. The Seattle Southside regional designation is recognized across all three cities, and the cities are marketed as a tourist destination under the Seattle Southside Regional Tourism Authority DMO. I can understand wanting citation and marking the additions as citation needed - I'm happy to find reliable sources as needed, in fact, the Tukwila page already links to Seattle Southside's website in a link that far predates my edits. I just want to find a way to include this regional link across the three cities in a way that makes sense. I recognize your expertise in this arena - while my account has been around a while, you'll see I haven't made a ton of edits in Wikipedia, so I definitely have a lot to learn. I do think this information is valuable and worthy of inclusion on all three pages - perhaps not in the summary area at the top of the article as I had originally placed them.

Any guidance you might be able and willing to provide would be greatly appreciated. Thank you for your time!--Sakanaya (talk) 17:59, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Sakanaya: Seattle Southside seems to be a marketing term more than an actual geographic distinction. Most reliable sources (like the Seattle Times, News Tribune, various Reporter papers) use "South King" except in sponsored pieces from the tourism agency. I'd be opposed to mentioning it in the articles at all, let alone the lead. Sounder Bruce 02:41, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Respectfully, I have to disagree with your assessment of Seattle Southside as a pure marketing term. First, the area's business interests are represented by the Seattle Southside Chamber of Commerce ([1]https://www.seattlesouthsidechamber.com/about), a completely separate organization from the Seattle Southside Regional Tourism Authority. This indicates a regional recognition separate from the marketing organization. Further, the Soundside Alliance ([2]https://soundsidealliance.org/about-soundside-alliance/), a business development organization and partnership of the five cities of Burien, SeaTac, Des Moines, Tukwila, and Normandy Park describes the region as the Seattle Southside region repeatedly across their site. I do agree that placing it in the lead was a bad choice, and that I recognize. I am merely working to improve the articles by linking them to their shared regional identity, which while the name, yes, was originally chosen by a marketing organization, it was done with consent, input, and funding from the governments of the cities it markets. Sakanaya (talk) 20:47, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Sakanaya: Those links make it clear that Southside is a made-up marketing term that doesn't represent the region at all. The county government does not use it in an official capacity, preferring South King. Local entities use South King in their names (such as South King Fire & Rescue) and local newspapers use it to describe the area (e.g. The Seattle Times). Sounder Bruce 03:38, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Skinner Building

Hoping you can revisit the Skinner Building article and AfD discussion once I've had more time to expand the entry.

Happy editing! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:58, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Another Believer: First of all, congratulations on the article and the 500K milestone. It's unfortunate the deletion request had to snowball like this, but I'm of the opinion that splitting an article needs to include a strong justification in the form of original content or clear plans to add them. The number of building stubs about Seattle is exploding and there's only so many hands to help maintain them; I've been too busy to grind my way through them and I imagine others have post-COVID burnout. Cheers, Sounder Bruce 03:46, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Are you still of the opinion that there's not enough unique content at Skinner Building (Seattle) to justify a separate entry from 5th Avenue Theatre? I'm sure there's more to add re: changes to building over time, tenants, the chimes, etc, so I'll keep going as I have time and interest. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:21, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Paseo (restaurant)

On 13 December 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Paseo (restaurant), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that when Seattle sandwich restaurant Paseo abruptly closed, fans left flowers and lit candles? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Paseo (Seattle restaurant). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Paseo (restaurant)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:03, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Restaurants 'n stuff

I'm beginning to think your aside at Daily Dozen -- "I would also ask that other restaurant articles be reviewed for notability, as there seems to be far too many that rely on coverage from listicles published by Thrillist and Eater" -- may need to be acted upon. One way or another I recently bumped into The Misfit (restaurant) and Pip's Original Doughnuts & Chai, and God damn it if they aren't even more absurd than Daily Dozen (hard to believe as that may be). He seems to be going around creating articles about every bar and restaurant that he notices has an online review. It's absurd. A multi-article AfD might be in order. E Eng 05:32, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@EEng: I think it might be best to determine what sources (and reviewers) are appropriate for determining the notability of a restaurant; I'm not trilled about Thrillist being used (as they seem to be a clickbait listicle site more than anything), so it might be a worthy one to discuss at WP:RSN. Sounder Bruce 07:32, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Don't you think the completely trivial nature of the coverage is the key point (even if we take the sources as reliable, for the sake of argument)? E Eng 12:25, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've also been long concerned about the quality of sourcing on these – they include primarily brief mentions in local listicles and routine local reviews that don't actually distinguish restaurants as notable. AB has now created roughly 20-25% of all US restaurant articles, and with that about 17% of US restaurants are in Portland! Quite a few have been at AFD before though a minority have been deleted since it forces him to dig for better sources. Thrillist etc. aren't necessarily unreliable, but it's not really encyclopedically significant to include such brief listings as content or toward notability. I nominated Daily Dozen the first time and am still concerned about how few sources are more than a couple sentences, but unlike most restaurant articles there's certainly a preponderance of them, including some that aren't strictly local (mainly due to its location in the market). I've haven't voted there yet to avoid the drama though. Please – stop bludgeoning the process, few comments there are actually that productive. Reywas92^Talk 14:22, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What you're saying is pretty much what I was saying just above: even if we assume the reliability of the sources (though, for all I know, that may be a problem as well) the coverage is not just not significant, but so superficial as to be laughable. I mean, is it really possible that there's an editor who thinks Example text actually belongs in an article?
Anyway, I'll make you a deal: I'll stop testing the limits of editors' willingness to make fools of themselves at Daily Dozen (fun though it's been) if you'll go vote. Since we've now got editors arguing that WP:SIGCOV should simply be ignored, a deep analysis isn't required. E Eng 14:47, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, because not fully complying with one of many RS guidelines is so, so, so much worse than openly canvassing for votes. You've got some gall.

ɱ

(talk) 16:13, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea how Reywas will !vote. He might be like you and just ignore WP:N. E Eng 18:02, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DYK Nomination for Global Majority

Hi there, I was wondering if you wouldn't mind revisiting my DYK nomination for Global Majority? I think all your concerns have been addressed and would be grateful if you think it is ready for a green light. —Caorongjin 💬 19:09, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, just wondering if there is anything else you think is needed or if you think the article is now neutral enough. Thanks! —Caorongjin 💬 10:47, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MLS All-Star Game

Anyway, I finished MLS All-Star Game MVP table for myself.

I have something to tell you. Don't you know meaning of incomplete template and Wikipedia:Collaborations?

If I was in your place, I'll help other user to fill out the empty table instead of deletion. Footwiks (talk) 10:37, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Footwiks: The burden lies solely on you to add the appropriate citations and fill out the table before it is merged into an existing and stable article. As many editors have reminded you, citations are required for information like this, and I'm unsure of where you are sourcing any of this information. Please consider making helpful edits instead of unsourced ones. Sounder Bruce 19:39, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Footwiks: You can't cite other Wikipedia entries. You must use outside sources. Do not attempt to copy and paste a dozen tables in here again. Sounder Bruce 03:03, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please check out the MLS All-Star Game article in detail.

In results by year section, There are all match reports including MVP winners. For example. this

I think that adding the citiations is waste of time and unproductive.

If you think that citiaions are also necessary in MVP section, you add the citiations by yourself. Footwiks (talk) 03:05, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have a question.

Firstly please check out the 2022 FIFA World Cup

In group stage and knockout stage, There are official match reports of all matches.

Therefore, citiations are enough in this article.

According to your logic,

Do you think that citiations are also necessary in Goalscorers section and Discipline section?

For example

8 goals
- Kylian Mbappé^[1]
7 goals
- Lionel Messi^[1]

and so on.

Do you want to attache the unsource template in Goalscorers section and Discipline section of 2022 FIFA World Cup article?

I don't understand the difference about adding of citiations in 2022 FIFA World Cup and MLS All-Star Game

Footwiks (talk) 03:31, 22 December 2022 (UTC) Footwiks (talk) 03:31, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Footwiks: Please consolidate your edits and use an edit summary. Being pinged eight times for a single reply is excessive. If you notice the goalscorers list for World Cups, there's a link to a source at the bottom (in this case, "Source: FIFA), which is generally sufficient. For a proper table, a citation needs to be in certain cells or in the headings, as demonstrated at List of MLS Cup finals. Please consider reading the citation policies before continuing, otherwise those edits will be undone. Sounder Bruce 03:49, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Landon Donovan MVP

Do you chase my contributions?

Please check out the below url

https://www.mlssoccer.com/news/major-league-soccer-names-most-valuable-player-award-after-landon-donovan

This url is active. Footwiks (talk) 05:18, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Footwiks: Don't accuse others of WP:HOUNDING. It's simply on my watchlist, as someone who edits MLS articles. Any further complaints will be tossed. Sounder Bruce 05:27, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I misunderstood that you chase my contributions in order to find my mistakes.

I am also interested in MLS articles. I don't want to argue with you about editing of MLS articles.

Let's improve quality of MLS articles together.

Have a nice day.Footwiks (talk) 06:03, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Footwiks: Just follow the basic citation policies, use edit summaries, and assume good faith. Please stop posting to this talk page. Sounder Bruce 06:11, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dextor Horton Building

Hey, Bruce! Hope you're having a nice holiday season. Wondering if you might be able to help with some confusion about a building entry.

I went here today. The building's exterior said 'Dexter Horton Building' in multiple places. I assumed the building had a Wikipedia entry, but Dexter Horton Building redirects to Maynard Building (119 First Avenue South), which is a different building a few blocks over. Do you happen to know if the Dexter Horton Building housing the Pegasus Coffee Bar is notable?

Extended content

I'm also curious about the nearby Central Building (810 3rd Ave), which I might have guessed was NRHP-listed but I can't find an entry.

Just curious if you were familiar with either given your work on building entries. Thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:24, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Another Believer: I think the Horton would be worthy of its own entry, but the sources are mostly locked away in NewsBank. Not sure about the Central Building, since it's a rather generic office building with very few hits in the Seattle Times archive.

Also, I would advise against creating too many stubs about Seattle topics given the recent attention. I do think some of the building stubs (such as Hilton Seattle and Renaissance Seattle Hotel) won't meet the informal notability criteria that is used for high-rises (400 feet in Seattle, higher in other cities) and should be evaluated, but I don't want to cause undue stress for you. Sounder Bruce 01:08, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Sorry for adding another stub to Wikipedia's to do list, but I've converted the redirect Dexter Horton Building into a stub to at least differentiate from the Maynard Building. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 01:36, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Soundbruce.

I would like to have communications with you, as I hope to work on the same articles as you. If you can point me in the right direction with some articles to work on that would be wonderful. If I am disturbing you, my apologies.

~~ Ytekai (talk) 19:02, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ytekai: You are welcome to work on generally any article that suits your interests. I would caution against using local knowledge or personal experience as a source; all statements need to be backed up with a inline citation to a reliable source. The edit I reverted at Kirkland, Washington was merely a matter of grammar: "in addition" doesn't suit the flow of the sentence even though it does function the same as "also". Sounder Bruce 01:31, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year, SounderBruce!

Happy New Year!

SounderBruce,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (talk) 17:39, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 17:39, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the 2023 WikiCup!

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2023 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page ready for you to take part. Any questions on the scoring, rules or anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:16, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year, SounderBruce!

Happy New Year!

SounderBruce,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 16:31, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 16:31, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to improve these MLS articles, you keep undoing my edits, why?

When you go to the MLS page, you want to see the list of champions in a simple "by year" format/table/list. I go to these pages and I don't see what I want, so I edit certain pages to enhance the their informative value, but you undo my edits with no discussion or explination. Why? Every edit is done in good faith. DavidESPN (talk) 00:22, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@DavidESPN: I leave explanations in the edit summary; I suggest that you use them as well to explain what you are doing in your edits. Wikipedia is not a statistics repository and requires proper context (in the form of prose) before and after such tables. All additions need to be cited to a reliable source, which you routinely do not provide; for articles that are already assessed to a higher standard (either FA, FL, or GA), those additions will be removed to maintain their quality. Sounder Bruce 00:31, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve had a simaler experience with this user. Bluefiredragon09 (talk) 15:20, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Promotion of MLS Cup 1999

Congratulations, SounderBruce! The article you nominated, MLS Cup 1999, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 00:15, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

About this edit

In this edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Olympic_National_Park&diff=1133040610&oldid=1133036988 you cited removal of valid archive links as the reason for rolling back, but I only removed them because I had linked to a new version of the exact same page after a website restructuring so they weren't dead anymore. I am confused as to why you reverted my edit because I linked to a liver version of the content so the archive was no longer necessary. BhamBoi (talk) 03:31, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@BhamBoi: The main issue is the insertion of duplicate links in addition to changes to archived URLs. Please provide updated archived URLs next time, and don't include blank parameters. Sounder Bruce 04:49, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I don't completely understand the WP:OVERLINK problem here. Should the website name not be linked in all the citations? Thanks BhamBoi (talk) 04:53, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, most references to live urls don't include an archive URL, is it really necessary? BhamBoi (talk) 04:56, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Only the first use of the publisher or work should be linked. Generally, the website should not be linked. Sounder Bruce 05:54, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

> Only the first use of the publisher or work should be linked.

Per WP:DUPLINK: "Citations stand alone in their usage, so there is no problem with repeating the same link in many citations within an article". Per the MOS itself, linking in citations is not under that guideline, and it is okay to link multiple times across multiple citations.

> Generally, the website should not be linked.

Per Template:Cite web#Website: "may be wikilinked if relevant" (Specifically about that parameter). It is okay to wikilink within the website name, and it was relevant in this case because it is linking to a relevant agency to the content of the article and the cited passage because they manage the park and are the authority on publishing information on it.

I don't think my edit needed to be reverted, as the reasons you citied for removing it are actually fine per above. BhamBoi (talk) 06:34, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Seattle SeaDogs

On 13 January 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Seattle SeaDogs, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Seattle SeaDogs won the final Continental Indoor Soccer League championship before the league folded? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Seattle SeaDogs. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Seattle SeaDogs), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Amakuru (talk) 12:02, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Los Angeles Salsa

On 16 January 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Los Angeles Salsa, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Los Angeles Salsa, from the United States, attempted to join a Mexican soccer league? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Los Angeles Salsa. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Los Angeles Salsa), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 12:03, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Overdone revert of articles by WP:COSMETIC

You reverted several Houston Metro train station articles with the following explanation:

Please refrain from making cosmetic changes, such as swapping {{reflist}} for {{Reflist}}. The addition of ages to the infobox dates is entirely unnecessary. Sounder Bruce 01:43, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My response follows ...

Please tell your bot to calm down. The reflist > Reflist changes are only made when other changes are made in the article; it's not only a "cosmetic change" to the article. For all of the articles your bot reverted, there were date changes in each article's infobox, which are now lost. Please revert your reverts so that those useful changes can be retained. Thanks. Truthanado (talk) 01:57, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Truthanado: The changes were made via a script, not a bot. These changes did not affect the date if you look at the diffs; it simply rolled back the changes to the version before February 5. Sounder Bruce 02:19, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you revert my edit

I clearly had fixed the interactive map on US 95. It was perfectly done and seemed alright. Why did you revert it and say it wasn't ready for mainspace use? It seemed fine to me. Sahas P. (talk) 19:03, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sahas P.: Half of the map is still using a gray line color. Please make sure to use the preview button and confirm that the maps are fully ready to go before publishing changes. Further attempts to add incomplete or broken maps will be reverted. Sounder Bruce 19:05, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I looked on my US 95 page and it seemed fine to me, and had specifically fixed the color of the line yesterday night on my sandbox. So how did it still have a gray line? It was red once I fixed it. Sahas P. (talk) 19:08, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Snohomish County Tribune article

Hello, Would you build an article about the Snohomish County Tribune ? Does it meet Notability guidelines ? If so then the info could be re-added from this edit rollback: [[3]] 67.183.171.8 (talk) 04:24, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of MLS Cup 2022

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article MLS Cup 2022 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Oltrepier -- Oltrepier (talk) 13:40, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of MLS Cup 2022

The article MLS Cup 2022 you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:MLS Cup 2022 and Talk:MLS Cup 2022/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Oltrepier -- Oltrepier (talk) 14:41, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why reversion of train station articles?

Curious why you reverted several train station articles (ex: METRORail Green Line that had their age added via the Template:Start date and age.

The Start date and age template describes its usage as:

"This template is most often used in infoboxes in articles about buildings or organizations, identifying when they were started/founded/opened or dissolved/ended/closed."

A train station is a building, and it is common for train station articles throughout the world to have their age (how many years since the station opened) identified in the station's infobox, along with the date the station opened. Similarly, if the station is defunct, the similar "End date and age" template is used to identify when how many years it has been since it closed.

Further, the edit to capitalize Reflist is only made to be consistent with Wikipedia filenames, which are capitalized, and for consistency with the majority of Wikipedia articles that use Reflist in its capitalized form. That change is only made when another change in the article is made; it is not just a cosmetic change.

Would you please reconsider your reverts? Truthanado (talk) 02:17, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Truthanado: The addition of an age note is not required by MOS:DATE, and template documentation is by no means a mandate. At higher levels (such as FAC), these templates are discouraged, as they add no value to readers (who can presumably do basic math) and add to an already cluttered infobox. The WikiProject Trains template does not endorse their use either. Addressing your second point: the uncapitalized form of "reflist" makes no difference in appearance or function; WP:COSMETICEDITs are discouraged, even by non-bots. Sounder Bruce 02:39, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We're not sure why you are so against adding an age note. The Template:Start date and age is used on approximately 131,000 Wikipedia pages, as the template's article says, which clearly makes it common use in Wikipedia. Many Wikipedia editors uses it in a wide variety of articles. Just because a guidleine doesn't require it doesn't mean it shouldn't be used, see WP:BOLD. Perhaps before you revert an article, you might want to discuss it with the community. Truthanado (talk) 02:39, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of MLS Cup 2022

The article MLS Cup 2022 you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:MLS Cup 2022 and Talk:MLS Cup 2022/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Oltrepier -- Oltrepier (talk) 13:22, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of MLS Cup 2022

The article MLS Cup 2022 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:MLS Cup 2022 for comments about the article, and Talk:MLS Cup 2022/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Oltrepier -- Oltrepier (talk) 21:41, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Flag of Snohomish County.png

The file File:Flag of Snohomish County.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused, superseded by File:Flag of Snohomish County, Washington.svg.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 08:34, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Belmont, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Belmont, Arizona 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/Belmont, Arizona 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 until the discussion has finished.

Mangoe (talk) 01:47, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2023 March newsletter

So ends the first round of the 2023 WikiCup. Everyone with a positive score moved on to Round 2, with 54 contestants qualifying. The top scorers in Round 1 were:

Unlimitedlead with 1205 points, a WikiCup newcomer, led the field with two featured articles on historical figures and several featured article candidate reviews.
Epicgenius was in second place with 789 points; a seasoned WikiCup competitor he specialises in buildings and locations in New York.
FrB.TG was in third place with 625 points, garnered from a featured article on a filmmaker which qualified for an impressive number of bonus points.
TheJoebro64, another WikiCup newcomer, came next with 600 points gained from two featured articles on video games.
Iazyges was in fifth place with 532 points, from two featured articles on classical history.

The top sixteen contestants at the end of Round 1 had all scored over 300 points; these included LunaEatsTuna, Thebiguglyalien, Sammi Brie, Trainsandotherthings, Lee Vilenski, Juxlos, Unexpectedlydian, SounderBruce, Kosack, BennyOnTheLoose and PCN02WPS. It was a high-scoring start to the competition.

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start again from scratch. The first round finished on February 26. Remember that any content promoted after that date but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Some contestants made claims before the new submissions pages were set up, and they will need to resubmit them. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed.

If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:37, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! Thank you for the cleanup!

Thanks for cleaning up the merge from Yesler Hillclimb to Yesler Terrace. I normally don't leave merged stuff just..parked, but just after I pasted the material in place, my dog needed an EMERGENCY walk. When she's going "hork hork hork," you can't say "Hang on there Meggins--I need to copyedit this stuff first!" Joyous! Noise! 23:04, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Joyous!: No worries, getting dragged away by your dog is definitely a valid excuse. Hope she's doing fine now. Sounder Bruce 23:05, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 2023 Seattle meetup

In the Seattle area? We are resuming Seattle monthly meetups on Tuesday, March 21, 2022, 5:45pm to 7:45pm at the Distant Worlds Coffeehouse as they have resumed their normal operating hours at their new location. For the address and to RSVP, please click here.

04:47, 15 March 2023 (UTC) To unsubscribe from future messages from Wikipedia:Meetup/Seattle, please remove your name from this list.

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:12, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Seattle SeaDogs

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Seattle SeaDogs you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Sammi Brie -- Sammi Brie (talk) 22:01, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Seattle SeaDogs

The article Seattle SeaDogs you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Seattle SeaDogs and Talk:Seattle SeaDogs/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Sammi Brie -- Sammi Brie (talk) 23:42, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Seattle SeaDogs

The article Seattle SeaDogs you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Seattle SeaDogs for comments about the article, and Talk:Seattle SeaDogs/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Sammi Brie -- Sammi Brie (talk) 05:42, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Washington State Route 528

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Washington State Route 528 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Bneu2013 -- Bneu2013 (talk) 09:44, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Washington State Route 528

The article Washington State Route 528 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Washington State Route 528 for comments about the article, and Talk:Washington State Route 528/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Bneu2013 -- Bneu2013 (talk) 03:01, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Promotion of List of Seattle Sounders FC seasons

Congratulations, SounderBruce! The list you nominated, List of Seattle Sounders FC seasons, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, PresN (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:43, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Route 395 "becomes"

I would like to attach the last portion of the talk page for State route 395 for your reference. It was the last thing to be established and nobody had any objections. If you dislike the word "becomes" so, so, much, please continue the conversation on the talk page. I have not reverted the last edit to avoid edit warring, however I wish to do so as soon as possible.

Zacharycmango (talk) 02:09, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have no objections to it, but there's better wait to avoid edit warring. A failure to assume good faith is going to make other editors less inclined to work with you. Sounder Bruce 02:11, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Gig Harbor, Washington

Hey there. I noticed some reverts at Gig Harbor, Washington, regarding the "native name". I almost always delete these from the infobox, but I do it because it's an incorrect use of the parameter. If you look at Template:Infobox settlement, the "native_name" parameter is the "name in the official local language". Many editors assume that because it says "native", this means the name translated into a local indigenous language. Perhaps the parameter name could be changed to avoid this confusion. Anyway, I often just move the text to the history section. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 08:36, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]