Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States

Main pageTalkEmbassyRequested
ArticlesMembersPortalRecognized
contentTo doHelp

Welcome to the discussion page of WikiProject United States

Help copy editing and reviewing content of my article please!

Hi everyone, my name is Amy and I'm writing my first ever Wikipedia article. It is classed as a stub in this WikiProject, and I believe I've expanded it well beyond that level. I would really appreciate some help with copy-editing but would love as well if you could just take a minute to read it as I've put a lot of effort in! I'm trying to bring the article beyond the stub category to a A, B, or C grade page. The page is about an extremist political group, the National Association for the Advancement of White People . Thanks for your help guys! Tofta22 (talk)

RfC on table style

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Moved to my talk page. Centralized discussion is no longer necessary. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 16:57, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

---

Should the style of articles beginning with "United States congressional delegations from" match the table style and broader format of featured lists such as United States congressional delegations from Indiana and Utah, or the articles for almost all of the other states, such as Alaska and California, or should each article be kept where it is per MOS:VAR? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 20:59, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Factors to consider:

• What are the advantages and disadvantages to each style?
• Should the style vary based on the size of the state and the length of its history in Congress?

United States Representatives from Alaska:

Main article: Alaska's at-large congressional district

Congress	District
	At-large
86th (1959–1961)	Ralph Julian Rivers (D)
87th (1961–1963)
88th (1963–1965)
89th (1965–1967)
90th (1967–1969)	Howard Wallace Pollock (R)
91st (1969–1971)
92nd (1971–1973)	Nick Begich (D)
	Don Young (R)
93rd (1973–1975)
94th (1975–1977)
95th (1977–1979)
96th (1979–1981)
97th (1981–1983)
98th (1983–1985)
99th (1985–1987)
100th (1987–1989)
101st (1989–1991)
102nd (1991–1993)
103rd (1993–1995)
104th (1995–1997)
105th (1997–1999)
106th (1999–2001)
107th (2001–2003)
108th (2003–2005)
109th (2005–2007)
110th (2007–2009)
111th (2009–2011)
112th (2011–2013)
113th (2013–2015)
114th (2015–2017)
115th (2017–2019)
116th (2019–2021)
117th (2021–2023)

United States Representatives from Utah:

Congress	Districts
	At-large from 1893–1913 1st from 1913–current		2nd		3rd		4th
54th (1895–1897)	style="background: Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/color" |	Clarence Emir Allen (R)
55th (1897–1899)	style="background: Template:Democratic Party (United States)/meta/color" |	William H. King (D)
56th (1899–1901)	style="background: Template:Democratic Party (United States)/meta/color" |	Brigham H. Roberts (D)
	style="background: Template:Democratic Party (United States)/meta/color" |	William H. King (D)
57th (1901–1903)	style="background: Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/color" |	George Sutherland (R)
58th (1903–1905)	rowspan=7 style="background: Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/color" |	Joseph Howell (R)
59th (1905–1907)
60th (1907–1909)
61st (1909–1911)
62nd (1911–1913)
63rd (1913–1915)	style="background: Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/color" |		Jacob Johnson (R)
64th (1915–1917)	rowspan=3 style="background: Template:Democratic Party (United States)/meta/color" |		James Henry Mays (D)
65th (1917–1919)	rowspan=2 style="background: Template:Democratic Party (United States)/meta/color" |	Milton H. Welling (D)
66th (1919–1921)
67th (1921–1923)	rowspan=6 style="background: Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/color" |	Don B. Colton (R)	rowspan=5 style="background: Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/color" |	Elmer O. Leatherwood (R)
68th (1923–1925)
69th (1925–1927)
70th (1927–1929)
71st (1929–1931)
72nd (1931–1933)	style="background: Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/color" |		Frederick C. Loofbourow (R)
73rd (1933–1935)	rowspan=4 style="background: Template:Democratic Party (United States)/meta/color" |	Abe Murdock (D)	rowspan=7 style="background: Template:Democratic Party (United States)/meta/color" |	J. W. Robinson (D)
74th (1935–1937)
75th (1937–1939)
76th (1939–1941)
77th (1941–1943)	rowspan=6 style="background: Template:Democratic Party (United States)/meta/color" |	Walter K. Granger (D)
78th (1943–1945)
79th (1945–1947)
80th (1947–1949)	style="background: Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/color" |		William A. Dawson (R)
81st (1949–1951)	rowspan=2 style="background: Template:Democratic Party (United States)/meta/color" |		Reva B. Bosone (D)
82nd (1951–1953)
83rd (1953–1955)	style="background: Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/color" |	Douglas R. Stringfellow (R)	rowspan=3 style="background: Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/color" |	William A. Dawson (R)
84th (1955–1957)	rowspan=3 style="background: Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/color" |	Henry A. Dixon (R)
85th (1957–1959)
86th (1959–1961)	rowspan=2 style="background: Template:Democratic Party (United States)/meta/color" |		David S. King (D)
87th (1961–1963)	style="background: Template:Democratic Party (United States)/meta/color" |	M. Blaine Peterson (D)
88th (1963–1965)	rowspan=4 style="background: Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/color" |	Laurence J. Burton (R)	style="background: Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/color" |	Sherman P. Lloyd (R)
89th (1965–1967)	style="background: Template:Democratic Party (United States)/meta/color" |		David S. King (D)
90th (1967–1969)	rowspan=3 style="background: Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/color" |		Sherman P. Lloyd (R)
91st (1969–1971)
92nd (1971–1973)	rowspan=5 style="background: Template:Democratic Party (United States)/meta/color" |	K. Gunn McKay (D)
93rd (1973–1975)	style="background: Template:Democratic Party (United States)/meta/color" |		Wayne Owens (D)
94th (1975–1977)	style="background: Template:Democratic Party (United States)/meta/color" |		Allan Turner Howe (D)
95th (1977–1979)	rowspan=4 style="background: Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/color" |		David D. Marriott (R)
96th (1979–1981)
97th (1981–1983)	rowspan="11" style="background: Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/color" |	James V. Hansen (R)
98th (1983–1985)	rowspan=4 style="background: Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/color" |			Howard C. Nielson (R)
99th (1985–1987)	style="background: Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/color" |		David S. Monson (R)
100th (1987–1989)	rowspan=3 style="background: Template:Democratic Party (United States)/meta/color" |		Wayne Owens (D)
101st (1989–1991)
102nd (1991–1993)	rowspan=3 style="background: Template:Democratic Party (United States)/meta/color" |			Bill Orton (D)
103rd (1993–1995)	style="background: Template:Democratic Party (United States)/meta/color" |		Karen Shepherd (D)
104th (1995–1997)	style="background: Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/color" |		Enid Greene (R)
105th (1997–1999)	rowspan=2 style="background: Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/color" |		Merrill Cook (R)	rowspan=6 style="background: Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/color" |	Chris Cannon (R)
106th (1999–2001)
107th (2001–2003)	rowspan=6 style="background: Template:Democratic Party (United States)/meta/color" |		Jim Matheson (D)
108th (2003–2005)	rowspan=10 style="background: Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/color" |	Rob Bishop (R)
109th (2005–2007)
110th (2007–2009)
111th (2009–2011)	rowspan=5 style="background: Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/color" |			Jason Chaffetz (R)
112th (2011–2013)
113th (2013–2015)	rowspan=6 style="background: Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/color" |		Chris Stewart (R)		style="background: Template:Democratic Party (United States)/meta/color" |	Jim Matheson (D)
114th (2015–2017)	rowspan=3 style="background: Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/color" |				Mia Love (R)
115th (2017–2019)
	rowspan=3 style="background: Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/color" |			John Curtis (R)
116th (2019–2021)	style="background: Template:Democratic Party (United States)/meta/color" |				Ben McAdams (D)
117th (2021–2023)	rowspan=1 style="background: Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/color" |	Blake Moore (R)			rowspan=1 style="background: Template:Republican Party (United States)/meta/color" |	Burgess Owens (R)
Congress	1st		2nd		3rd		4th
	Districts

Gonna need some visual examples, here. GoodDay (talk) 22:03, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

The best examples are United States congressional delegations from Utah and United States congressional delegations from Oregon, and I put examples of the two tables above. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 22:40, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I reckon the best way to go, is the maps version. Otherwise, you're gonna have a ton of images in the California delegation article. GoodDay (talk) 23:42, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 04:41, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps this topic is a bit over my head. Best for others to chime. GoodDay (talk) 12:43, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Theleekycauldron: I'm now noticing United States congressional delegations from Massachusetts, which is the first page I've seen that uses {{Party cell}} templates. Might this be a good compromise between readability and getting the most possible information across? I still find it a tad hard to visualize compared to party shading, but it's certainly easier than utilizing a separate cell, and I can definitely see how the text would be more readable this way. --WMSR (talk) 15:09, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@WMSR: first of all, I'm using yo instead of ping forever. Thank you for that, that's fantastic. Second, i'd be more than happy to match the Massachusetts style (with some variations state-by-state), but is it within MOS:VAR for us to update the tables that way? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 22:13, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Theleekycauldron: I think so, because many of the party shading templates are not compliant with MOS:COLORS, which can cause accessibility issues (especially those of some smaller parties). That said, I'm not sure whether {{Cell party}} would work quite as well on pages like Political party strength in Alaska, for example. --WMSR (talk) 22:23, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@WMSR: fantastic– I think my next project is going to be fixing up United States congressional delegations from Alaska, then. I'm going to close this RfC within a day. Also, it's not a huge problem if I switch the senate template so that the colours oppose each other, right? because otherwise it's just gonna be a pain. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 22:28, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Theleekycauldron: Awesome, though I'm not sure what you mean by switch the template so that the colors oppose each other. --WMSR (talk) 22:32, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@WMSR: so you know how on United States congressional delegations from Massachusetts, if you go to the Senate table, the party colours are both to the left of the names? i feel like those should be outwards instead–so on the left for the leftward name, and on the right for the rightward name. The alternating colours should be inward, next to the Congress. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 22:36, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Theleekycauldron: Gotcha. I'm going to have to do some work on the {{Party cell}} template then to make a parameter for which side to shade. Been a while since I messed with parameters like that so I may need some time (unless you can do it easily). --WMSR (talk) 22:47, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@WMSR: I can fix the party cell template, no need :) thanks so much for the help! hope to see you again around wikipedia :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 23:15, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Theleekycauldron: Ope, I just did. Param 2 is side (default is left), param 3 is position (for politicians who change parties, otherwise no need to define). Working on documentation now. --WMSR (talk) 23:24, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Finished documentation. Check out United_States_congressional_delegations_from_Alabama#United_States_Senate to see how I envision it being utilized when I made the new params. Obviously, if there's a better way, I'm all ears. --WMSR (talk) 23:58, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@WMSR: damn! put a lot of work into the Alabama senate part, too- props. I think the party colouring should go outward, instead of being inward and right next to the alternating colours denoting term? Makes it less overwhelming on that front. Also, with regards to the names, it should probably be one name throughout multiple parties, or several separated by hard boxes–the middle ground seems like there's something off but i'm open to either way? just suggestions theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 00:22, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@Theleekycauldron: My thinking was that having it in the middle makes it easier to visualize the balance of the delegation in any given Congress. It's also how Utah was laid out (and Hawaii previously). I am also not sure about what to do with party switchers. Only putting the name once would make it off-center and it would not be clear which party goes in the parentheses. This was sort of my best attempt but I'm sure someone has a better idea. I wish others would chime in! --WMSR (talk) 00:43, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@WMSR: really would be nice if others participate, but this is rather back-water so it looks like it's just us for now. Maybe we make the party colours the same thickness as the alternating colours, and that way they're not overshadowed? For the party switchers, I'd say just make separate hard boxes for each party switch? I don't think we have a better method of representation at the moment, which sucks. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 00:50, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@Theleekycauldron: How do you feel about dashed lines for party switches? I updated the template and think it might once again be the best of both worlds. For alternating term colors, i think we just set the width on the column to a super low number. --WMSR (talk) 02:35, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@WMSR: oooo the dashed lines are good. What are you suggesting with the column width? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 02:56, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@Theleekycauldron: Well, I tried removing the non-breaking spaces and that seemed to make it better (check Alabama). Not sure if the columns can be narrowed any further though. Also just want to say that I'm really enjoying this collaboration! --WMSR (talk) 03:18, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@WMSR: That works well! Any concern about the party cells for some reason showing up ever so slightly on the other sides of the cells? Please reply on my talk page, as I think the public section of the RfC has passed its purpose. Also, I'm very much enjoying working with you too! I haven't had this much fun on wikipedia in quite some time. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 16:57, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

• Provide more rather than less information, and provide it in the form that is easiest to read. The main tables in these articles are almost identical. They get very different in the "Historical timeline" sections, and the version with separate tables instead of one giant table is much easier to make sense of, but if there's information types missing from it then it should be expanded to include them if we think it's info of encyclopedic interest (which it likely is, though a discussion won't hurt).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  14:50, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Notes

References

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Template Resurrection:Idaho

I want to gather Consensus on resurrecting a long dead, separate template for Wikipedia:WikiProject Idaho, as I want to get some Task Forces going. But it would require the removal (probably) of some parameters from the Main Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_United_States template... and a fairly large SUBST, which is going to look pretty odd in View History... In General, I think I would 1) LEAVE the US Template; 2) Drop the ID Specific parameters 3) ADD the Idaho Template (Same "class", same "importance").
Could you please reply with your consensus (or oppositions)? with rationale please... Mjquinn_id (talk) 15:51, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

User:Mjquinn id: Can you provide more context? Also, what do you mean by "require ... a fairly large SUBST"? DesertPipeline (talk) 09:43, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

So, The WikiProject Idaho template was rebuilt as a wrapper a couple years ago. A wrapper to the US Template. Being thorough, they also put into place an auto WP:SUBST that rebuilds the Idaho template into the US template with the ID flags. In trying to rebuild the project, I need to reverse that. Finding the US Template WITH the ID=yes flag and reverse it; dropping ID parameters and ADDING the new ID Template. (Currently in the template's sandbox).

1. ) I didn't want to perform a change on some 2,000 pages without getting some kind of consensus with the US Project first. Especially, pulling the ID flag from the US Talk Banner... unless you are ok leaving it there?
2. ) Though I have worked with templates for quite a while, this would be the largest change that I have pulled off. Might be nice to have another template expert looking over my shoulder? - Mjquinn_id (talk) 14:17, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

User:Mjquinn id: Thank you for the explanation. I can't say I completely understand; therefore, I think it would be best to wait until others who understand this properly respond. Regards, DesertPipeline (talk) 20:56, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

User:Mjquinn id: Since you haven't had any responses yet, you might consider posting about this on Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). DesertPipeline (talk) 07:36, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

DesertPipeline: Many thanks. Mjquinn_id (talk) 19:51, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Zachary Taylor

Anyone interested in working on Zachary Taylor? It had a few citation needed tags but otherwise seems in decent shape. An editor a has requested a GAR reassessment, but I feel it could be relatively easily fixed by one or two interested editors. Unfortunately the editor who got it to GA standard no longer edits. Aircorn (talk) 09:08, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Battle of Brices Cross Roads#Requested move 14 August 2021

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Battle of Brices Cross Roads#Requested move 14 August 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — Shibbolethink ^{(♔ ♕)} 11:12, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Twenty-Tens Decade Started

Hello editors of the WikiProject of the United States. I wanted to inform you guys that the WikiProject of the Twenty-Tens decade started recently. Feel free to join the new WikiProject! Elijahandskip (talk) 02:29, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Discussion over the Door County Wisconsin article

There is currently a discussion about what to keep, what to remove, and what to split off into separate pages at Talk:Door_County,_Wisconsin#Article_length_and_amount_of_sources; things are still being sorted out.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 23:38, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

You Are My Sunshine

Why is this song low-importance? I realize our article sucked, but I am trying to make it better. Just curious how you guys look at it. Thanks Tillywilly17 (talk) 04:02, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:COVID-19 misinformation by the United States#Requested move 30 August 2021

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:COVID-19 misinformation by the United States#Requested move 30 August 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ––FormalDude talk 08:21, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Could you please review this USA focused COVID-19 related article: COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in the United States ?

I am working on expanding the COVID-19 coverage on wikipedia. I have published a couple related articles recently: COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in the United States and High-risk people. If you could take a look and possibly make an edit, let me know what you think in the talk page, I would appreciate it. Open to any feedback.

Thank you again. --Wil540 art (talk) 18:23, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Race in 2020 Census data

I have two comments about the recently released 2020 census data, which can be noted in this diff[1]:

1. Each of the five races (White, Black, Asian, American Indian/Alaska Native, and Pacific Islander) is enumerated both as race alone, and as race alone or in combination. We need to decide which will be listed first in the article, and whether both will be given in the infobox.
2. There has clearly been a significant change in how Hispanics/Latinos are counted. Hispanics who identified their race as White alone dropped from 27 million in 2010 to 13 million in 2020, while Hispanics who identified as two or more races rose from 3 million to 20 million. How should this be dealt with, especially in the articles Hispanic and Latino Americans and White Hispanic and Latino Americans? Will they still be considered as white, or not? —Lights and freedom (talk ~ contribs) 03:17, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

A similar discussion about this is ongoing at Talk:United States#How to approach 2020 census data (ethnicity and race). I suggested that we start listing both race alone and in comination on all articles where it is necessary to list this data. 2020 census data on race and ethnicity is not directly comparable to data from past censuses, due to changes in methodology, something the census bureau has cautioned. Bneu2013 (talk) 16:45, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Tuck School of Business FAR

I have nominated Tuck School of Business 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. Bumbubookworm (talk) 13:08, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

California College Republicans

has been recreated by a new editor; experienced editors might want to check their work. I see some unsourced BLP claims, and some unsourced non-notable namedrops. 2005 AFD on it was kinda leaning WP:NOPAGE though most of the discussion focused on how poorly the article was written; I leave it to regular America editors to decide whether it still applies since a lot has happened in American politics since then. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:29, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Death of Gabby Petito#Requested move 21 September 2021

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Death of Gabby Petito#Requested move 21 September 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. SK2242 (talk) 21:43, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Odwalla FAR

I have nominated Odwalla 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. Z1720 (talk) 20:37, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

RfC discussion at Talk:Second Cold War (September 2021)

I started an RfC discussion: Talk:Second Cold War#RfC: Use a map, an image, or neither? --George Ho (talk) 18:24, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Request for comment: Consistent article titles re: ethnic groups in the United States

Should we seek to make the titles of entries about ethnic groups in the United States more consistent? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:27, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

If you poke around Category:Ethnic groups in the United States, or more specifically Category:Ethnic groups in the United States by city and Category:Ethnic groups in the United States by state, you'll notice inconsistency with how articles are titled. For instance, in Oregon there's Hispanics and Latinos in Portland, Oregon, History of Chinese Americans in Portland, Oregon, and History of the Japanese in Portland, Oregon.

Category:Chinese-American history shows some consistency across city entries using "History of Chinese Americans in XXX". Category:Korean-American culture by city is fairly inconsistent: there are entries using "History of Koreans in XXX", "History of Korean Americans in XXX", "History of the Korean Americans in XXX", and "Koreans in XXX". The categories Japanese-American culture by city and Hispanic and Latino American history are inconsistent.

Here's my question: Should we seek to make the titles of entries about ethnic groups in the United States more consistent?

If so, there seem to be several options:

1. Use "History of XXX in YYY" (example: History of Chinese Americans in Portland, Oregon)
2. Use "History of the XXX in YYY" (example: History of the Japanese in Portland, Oregon)
3. Use "XXX in YYY" (example: Hispanics and Latinos in Portland, Oregon; Koreans in New York City)
4. Use "XXX culture in XXX" (example: Hispanic and Latino culture in Portland, Oregon)

I'm thinking we should decide if the words "history" or "culture" are helpful in the titles of such articles, or if simply mentioning the ethnic group and geography are all that's necessary. If we can come to a consensus, many page moves will be required to make entries consistent, but then we'd have a solid standard moving forward. I invite all to weigh in, discuss pros and cons, and select a preferred format (if applicable).

Thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:27, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

I prefer "X in Y" because it's the simplest and broadest. History is not necessarily culture and vice versa, and "History of" articles are not limited to that, also including the current demographics and culture as well. The other inconsistency though is whether "Americans" is included, e.g. History of Korean Americans in Boston vs History of Koreans in Baltimore – I would include that. Reywas92^Talk 19:11, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

@Another Believer: what is your brief and neutral statement? At over 2,300 bytes, the statement above (from the {{rfc}} tag to the next timestamp) is far too long for Legobot (talk · contribs) to handle, and so it is not being shown correctly at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Society, sports, and culture. The RfC may also not be publicised through WP:FRS until a shorter statement is provided. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:15, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

@Redrose64: See brief and neutral statement in bold. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 23:00, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Then it needs to be first, with its own timestamp, otherwise Legobot cannot pick it out from the rest of the text. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 06:45, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

I agree with "X in Y" (3) due to its simplicity and broader definition. As Reywas92 mentioned, I think the inclusion of "Americans" should be decided upon, but I don't have an opinion on that part. Bsoyka (talk · contribs) 04:28, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

• Strong oppose A and B, support C in consistency with most other Wikipedia pages (Americans in the Philippines, Americans in the United Kingdom, Americans in Pakistan, Americans in India, etc. etc.). Using "history" seems to assume that such an ethnic group no longer exists or has been assimilated, that the for example French ethnicity of a French person who migrated to the USA 1 week ago is "part of history", even when that person might still identify as a French and not as a French American or American of French origin. "Culture" is unorthodox and has a less broad scope. Super Ψ Dro 08:57, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Fried chicken which may be of interest to you. Please consider posting a comment there. Thank you.--John Cline (talk) 21:26, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

FAR notice

I have nominated The Greencards 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 _Talk 03:36, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:The Conversation#Requested move 30 September 2021

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:The Conversation#Requested move 30 September 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vpab15 (talk) 18:47, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Obama FAR

I have nominated Barack Obama 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. Therapyisgood (talk) 01:06, 20 October 2021 (UTC)