Jump to content

Talk:Washington (state): Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Cascadia (talk | contribs)
→‎Ameri-co-centricity, is in the air for you and me...: Common use vs. Chronologic and The Order of Political Succession
Line 113: Line 113:
Apologies to [[Kraftwerk]]. I'm just wondering why there is a debate amongst Americans about whether [[Washington]] should point to an article about the American president or the American state, when in fact the ''original'' [[Washington, Tyne and Wear|Washington]] in England (which George Washington, and hence all other things called Washington, is named after) is surely a far more obvious candidate, despite the slight inconvenience of not being American. [[User:217.155.20.163|217.155.20.163]] 23:23, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Apologies to [[Kraftwerk]]. I'm just wondering why there is a debate amongst Americans about whether [[Washington]] should point to an article about the American president or the American state, when in fact the ''original'' [[Washington, Tyne and Wear|Washington]] in England (which George Washington, and hence all other things called Washington, is named after) is surely a far more obvious candidate, despite the slight inconvenience of not being American. [[User:217.155.20.163|217.155.20.163]] 23:23, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
:Oh, you're right.. A town in the UK that isn't known aside from its immediate neighbors should definitely be located at [[Washington]]. After all, being the [[Boston, Lincolnshire|original]] is far more important than being the more [[Boston|commonly known]]. Heh. Thanks for stopping by.--[[User:Bobblehead|Bobblehead]] <sup>[[User talk:Bobblehead|(rants)]]</sup> 02:53, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
:Oh, you're right.. A town in the UK that isn't known aside from its immediate neighbors should definitely be located at [[Washington]]. After all, being the [[Boston, Lincolnshire|original]] is far more important than being the more [[Boston|commonly known]]. Heh. Thanks for stopping by.--[[User:Bobblehead|Bobblehead]] <sup>[[User talk:Bobblehead|(rants)]]</sup> 02:53, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
::Despite bobblehead's sarcastic response, there are things to remember that may seem like "Ameri-centricity":
::# Common use trumps chronological order.
::# In geographic terms, the Order of Political Succession is used (Country, Region, State/Province, County/Parish, Metro City, Large City, Small City, Town, Township, Village, Hamlet... down to address.)
::It's not American-centric as much as it is logic and order. <sup>[[Wikipedia:Editor review/Cascadia 2|Review Me]]</sup>[[User:Cascadia|<font color="#567E3A">'''CASCADIA''']]</font><sup><font color="#2F4F2F">[[User talk:cascadia|Howl]]</font></sup>/<sub><font color="#2F4F2F">[[Special:Contributions/Cascadia|Trail]]</font></sub> 14:04, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:04, 12 May 2007

Archives: Dec 20, 2006

WikiProject iconUnited States B‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconUnited States: Washington Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Washington.

Template:FAOL

"Washington State" vs. "Washington state"

I know it's a small semantic issue, but when using the term "Washington State," "state" should be capitalized when referring to the government or some other proper noun agency (e.g. Washington State Office of Financial Management) and it should be lowercase when referring to the geographical area. — DustinGC (talk | contribs) 21:42, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely agreed. --Lukobe 05:42, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree. A quick search of on-line grammar/style pages on Google shows a unanimous preference for Washington State, whether referring to state gov't or the geographical area above Oregon. It's state of Washington, but Washington State. --barneca (talk) 02:16, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The lowercase form is actually correct, as Washington State would imply that the term "State" is actually part of the state name. Cascadia TALK| HISTORY 02:23, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barneca, looking at your results (where are the on-line grammar/style pages?), it's obvious the capitalization of "state" is used in the name of government agencies where all important words are capitalized. I agree with the others, it should be lowercase. --Chris S. 02:59, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I did my part, I looked it up to make sure I wasn't misremembering what I was taught before I posted anything. The first three hits on the link above are grammar/style guides, and they agree with my interpretation. After several links to university and state government pages (which don't prove or disprove anything), looking at the next 10 or 15 pages yields, on balance, similar results. Calling it unanimous was wrong, but the consensus in those pages is clearly for "Washington State". I would have liked to see a slam-dunk, like Strunk and White or something, but couldn't find an irrefutable source, neither for or against "State." I never reverted anything, so you folks do whatever you want to do, but I'd love to see an actual cite from a respected arbiter of style for "Washington state". Perhaps there is no uniform standard. (And the BBC doesn't count, as I believe British spelling capitalization rules differ from US spelling capitalization rules.) --barneca (sorry, very sleepy. spelling is a whole other kettle of fish). (talk) 03:51, 3 April 2007 (UTC) --barneca (talk) 03:53, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, let me put it two you two different ways. 1)Washington, the state, is ONLY DEFINED AS WASHINGTON. A capitalization of State would indicate that the legal name of the state was Washington State. It is not. Government agencies capitalize the term State as part of their proper name. Washington State University is one such example. 2)Please take this example from the State of Washington website How to become a Resident of Washington state, please remember the heading is capitalized as part of a heading stylization. Cascadia TALK| HISTORY 03:58, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I found an authoritative source. From the Chicago Manual of Style, 13th ed., section 7.37:
In general, words designating political divisions of the world, a country, state, city, and so forth, are capitalized when they follow the name and form an accepted part of it: empire, state, county, city, kingdom, colony, territory, etc. They are usually, though not always, lowercased when they precede the name or stand alone:
(snip several other examples)
Washington State; the state of Washington
--barneca (talk) 22:34, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I do not consider a manual of style as an authoritative source, because they define how it should appear within that style. Besides, by that measure, the following is listed in the Associated Press Style Manual:
"Use state of Washington or Washington state when necessary to distinguish the state from the District of Columbia. (Washington State is the name of a university in the state of Washington)."
pp. 239, Associated Press Style Book, ISBN 0-7382-0740-3. Cascadia TALK| HISTORY 23:48, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(undent, since indentation is messed up anyway)
I know, I know, a sane man would just let this die. But I have a couple of points:

  1. When we are purely talking about matters of style, I don’t see how you can say you don’t accept a manual of style as authoritative.
  2. The WP:Manual of Style specifically references The Chicago Manual of Style as an authoritative style guide. The other guides mentioned by WP:MOS are silent on this subject.
  3. One of the references above (I cannot find it right now, I suspect it was one of the google links) has the quite reasonable suggestion to just reword to avoid confusion. In a couple of minutes I’m going to go ahead and say "state of Washington" instead of "Washington State" everywhere except the specific line describing the use of the term “Washington State”. (actually, this is slightly complicated. Often, it's a title (all capitalized), and sometimes it refers to, f.ex., Washington state seal, which I believe is correct since "state" refers to "seal", not "Washington". Anyway, I'll do it sometime tonight)
  4. After points 1-2 above, I'm somewhat tempted to change the one remaining instance back to Washington State. But in cases where WP:Bold conflicts with WP:Consensus, I suppose common courtesy would be to err on the side of consensus. (Plus, I couldn't look at myself in the mirror if I found myself in an edit war over this.)
  5. Would you all now agree that I've backed up my position well enough that you don't have a problem with Washington State in the one remaining instance? If so, I'll go ahead and do it.
  6. If not, how would you like to proceed? If you're curious what they would say, we could ask at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style.
--barneca (talk) 22:23, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Except "State" isn't part of the proper name and where the Wikipedia style guide makes explicit instruction, it over-rides Chicago. WP is explicit that only proper nouns should be capitalized. Chicago isn't even consistent on this, [1], and they capitalize things we would not here at WP. This is clear that putting state after Washington is a redundancy, but also clear that when done to disambiguate from the DC to use lower case.
So please do not capitalize state. SchmuckyTheCat 23:55, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In regards to this article, rather than change Washington state to state of Washington or Washington State, I'd just drop all references to Washington state or state of Washington that is not part of a proper name as it is an unnecessary disambiguation. It's the equivalent of referring to Gary Locke as "Gary Locke (politician)" throughout his own article. The only exception being the one in the intro where a majority of editors (including myself) seem to prefer "Washington state" to "Washington State". --Bobblehead 00:49, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Schmucky, "Washington State" is a proper noun; that's my whole point. That's why it's "the state of Washington", but "Washington State". The CMOS link you gave is consistent, and explicitly agrees with me: "...or the exact geographical entity, uppercase." And we've already established that there are different opinions on this; but in matters of style, an explicit recommendation of "State" by an authoritative style guide should trump a King County web page.
If CMOS has said "Washington state", I would have accepted it and moved on. One of the big ideas here, as I understand it, is respect for authoritative, verifiable sources. Could someone please at least address the issue that CMOS explicitly, as a specific example, gives it as "Washington State"? Or that a large majority of Google hits give the same thing? Or that, when several styles are both OK, deference should be given to the original? --barneca (talk) 01:06, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
When you search google, you're looking 90% of the time at items that are actual departments of the state. They are capitalized because, for example, it is the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). CMOS is a manual of style, yes, but there is also APA style, AMA style, etc., all each have their own style. I specifically cited the Associated Press Stylebook as an example that stylebooks and manuals of style are not necessarily going to have a standard. The issue is what is the legal term for the state. It is either State of Washington or just simply Washington, except when used as a department entity name. The government pages referenced (one King County webpage, and another, a page from the State of Washington itself, expressly use the term "Washington state" when implying dis-ambiguity. Furthermore, as I've stated, the reason why we do not use "Washington State" is for 2 primary reasons: "Washington State" is the name of a University IN Washington, and the state's legal name is not Washington State, it is simply Washington. "state" is only added in to make sure people do not confuse it with George or D.C.. In addition to all of this, having been a resident of Washington for over 12 years before moving back to Arizona, I can safely say with certain assuredness that the word "state" is only capitalized when referring to WSU. The official governments of the State of Washington use that form of capitalization, and I think they would be the official deciding factor in how their name is legally presented. Cascadia TALK| HISTORY 01:21, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As I specifically said above, "State" is still the majority use when you weed out official state websites. But that doesn't matter. As I said above, I know there is disagreement, even among manuals of style. That's why I think we should defer to what WP:MOS specifically lists as an authoritative style guide. Legality has nothing to do with it; it doesn't matter what the legal name is, it matters how you're using it.
OK, you wore me out. I'm disappointed, not because I didn't "win", but because I really feel no one is addressing my main points (by "main points", I mean the specific three things I mentioned, again, in my last paragraph). Cascadia, all of your points above I believe I already addressed, except your mention of living there for 12 years; I lived there for 8. Is that how we decide things? I can tell you, with certain assurance, your generalization is absolutely not universally agreed-to. I have tried my best to answer everyone's objections, but I honestly think no one is returning me the same courtesy. I'll leave this discussion now, as I feel myself getting cranky and that's probably not good for anybody, and I think everyone here can see no one is going to change their minds. --barneca (talk) 01:55, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Has anyone considered how this issue would look for other states, like say Nebraska. The term "Nebraska State" makes me think of a school. "Nebraska state" also looks like a school name. To refer to Nebraska as a state, wouldn't people say "the state of Nebraska"? Pfly 05:13, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barneca, I appologize if you feel I wasn't addressing your points. Your main point was that the CMOS lists it as being Washington State. The part of WP:MOS I feel you may have left out was the preceding line: Some examples of authoritative style guides are:, then it lists two, including CMOS. Meaning it is not the absolute and only authoritative style manual. Why is CMOS any higher than the Associated Press Sylebook? That is why I found a source directly from the state government, which, like I stated, would know best how to use the term "state" when referring to Washington state. All you've stated is that CMOS and the interpretation of a google search should trump the websites of the counties of Washington state, and the State of Washington itself, which in all honesty use the term day in and day out. And about my years of residency in Washington, I only added that in to illustrate my frustration of the fact you keep leaning on CMOS, although myself and at lest one other editor has shown you uses of "Washington state" that come from official sources outside of a sytlebook, and I had cited a direct quote from another 'authoritative' stylebook. Again, I apologize if you feel I wasn't addressing your points. Cascadia TALK| HISTORY 05:25, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I still disagree, but am not quite as cranky this AM as I was last night, and apologize for the snippyness. I'll defer to the overwhelming opposition; I doubt there's any point to further discussion. --barneca (talk) 10:49, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sales Tax

I've changed the sales tax to 8.8% before, but it gets reverted. I know for a fact it is 8.8%, so let it be known 6.2% is not correct. N734LQ 03:12, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, you are incorrect. Per Washington State Department of Revenue, State Sales Tax is 6.5% state wide, with varying County, City, and Special Jurisdiction taxes collected. Source: WaDOR Tax Finder GIS. CascadiaTALK|HISTORY 14:45, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yep. It's 8.8% or thereabouts in Seattle, but the minimum statewide tax is a couple points lower. --Lukobe 05:42, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Transportation

Article assert "Boeing Field in Seattle is the busiest airport by numbers of planes in the world." But I cannot find a citation for the claim, and I don't mean this kind of citation. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.17.40.34 (talk) 22:01, 22 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]


FoxNews contradicts. 216.254.22.4 21:18, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spanish wikipedia better

The Washington article on the Spanish wikipedia, http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_%28estado%29 has become a featured article, and although I can't read Spanish, it is clear that the article there is better than the one here. Check it out, and why not improve this one? Pfly 09:19, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your suggestion. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to change it. You can edit almost any article on Wikipedia by just following the Edit link at the top of the page. We encourage you to be bold in updating pages, because wikis like ours develop faster when everybody edits. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. You can always preview your edits before you publish them or test them out in the sandbox. If you need additional help, check out our getting started page or ask the friendly folks at the Teahouse. --Lukobe 05:42, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

"H E L L O WHAT'S UR NAME??" has absolutely no bearing on the subject whatsoever. I'd remove it myself, but when I go to edit the page, it isn't there. 71.217.114.221 04:09, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Might be looking at an old version of the article. That was removed on the 19th. --Bobblehead 04:15, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation

What is the rationale for Washington pointing to the State's article as opposed to any of the other possibilities, including George Washington - the namesake of most places with that name, Washington DC - the capitol city of one of the largest countries, or going directly to a disambiguation page? The only discussion on this I found was a suggestion to use the model of Lincoln, whereby the name is a redirect to a disambig. That never seems to have been implemented. Is that a resolved solution awaiting implementation? Tritium6 21:23, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is because the State of Washington is the only term that really only goes by simply "Washington", Washington, DC is, well, Washington, D.C., and George Washington is George Washington. Any place that would have a Washington County, their articles would be "Washington County, (insert state here)". If you want George or D.C., you should really be searching those terms as those are the proper names. CascadiaTALK|HISTORY 21:57, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I must agree with Cascadia. The state of Washington is the primary entity referred to by the name Washington. — Knowledge Seeker 23:01, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but please provide some support for that statement, Knowledge Seeker. I suspect that you are perhaps drawing from personal experience around your neck of the woods, wherever that may be. Globally, Washington refers to the capital of the USA. Do you think many people outside the US even know there is a state named Washington? Perhaps in Canada and western Europe, but for billions of others, the lack of a disambig at Washington leads to them reading about Washington state and thinking they are reading about the capital. The lack of a disambig is a very USA-centric (or Washington state-centric) decision. Cascadia - please read the Washington, D.C. article. Washington is the name of the city. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tritium6 (talkcontribs) 19:23, 17 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]
If you feel you're right, you can certainly open up a move request for this page, however I would advise looking at the last proposed move. It might help you analyze the arguments for and against the move. However, I would like to calm your specific fears about confusion--I can pretty much guarantee you that practically no one comes here and reads the article thinking that they are reading about the city. That whole "Washington is a state" bit (the first four words of the article) probably makes sure of that. Matt Yeager (Talk?) 22:32, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If anyone who reads the first line of the article and still thinks they are reading about the Capital of the United States needs more than a disambiguation page to fix that. The lack of an automatic disambiguation page is not very USA-Centric NOR Washington-centric, it is simply acknowledging the realities of the actual terms, not the misconception: Washington=the state; George Washington=The Man; Washington, D.C.=The Capital of the U.S.A.. And should you need support, I give you Washington, Washington, D.C.; Washington, DC Tourism site using "Washington, D.C.", Washington, D.C. Government Site "DC.Gov". CASCADIAHowl/Trail 05:18, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

State symbols

I have removed two items under "State Symbols", the idea that the Onion is the official Vegetable and the Blueberry Muffin is the state muffin. Neither of these items are listed at the Washington State Legislature page on State Symbols. Cascadia TALK| HISTORY 23:39, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Politics

I added a reference to a Seattle P I article discussing the contested election, but am not sure how to properly place the reference as a footnote. The subsequent trial following the election is a valid point to include, since it discusses the vote tallies and the margin of error.

Add <ref> and </ref> around a normal addition of an external URL, at the end of the sentence or paragraph. CASCADIAHowl/Trail 19:10, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just figured it out, thanks.

05 or 06?

According to the census the population is 6.3m, in the intro it says this a 06 number in the demograghics it says this is a 05 number, I think it is 2005 but its locked up.

According the the U.S. Census, it's a 2006 figure. I've changed the Demographics section. --barneca (talk) 16:33, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ameri-co-centricity, is in the air for you and me...

Apologies to Kraftwerk. I'm just wondering why there is a debate amongst Americans about whether Washington should point to an article about the American president or the American state, when in fact the original Washington in England (which George Washington, and hence all other things called Washington, is named after) is surely a far more obvious candidate, despite the slight inconvenience of not being American. 217.155.20.163 23:23, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, you're right.. A town in the UK that isn't known aside from its immediate neighbors should definitely be located at Washington. After all, being the original is far more important than being the more commonly known. Heh. Thanks for stopping by.--Bobblehead (rants) 02:53, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Despite bobblehead's sarcastic response, there are things to remember that may seem like "Ameri-centricity":
  1. Common use trumps chronological order.
  2. In geographic terms, the Order of Political Succession is used (Country, Region, State/Province, County/Parish, Metro City, Large City, Small City, Town, Township, Village, Hamlet... down to address.)
It's not American-centric as much as it is logic and order. Review MeCASCADIAHowl/Trail 14:04, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]