Talk:Spokane, Washington

Archive

I archived the page like a month ago, and its already long again. Do you guys wanna set up a system to archive? Or how do you wanna do this? We need to form some consensus. I think we should archive very soon. It doesn't have to be the entire page, maybe just the older stuff. When I created the first archive for this page, I did the copy-and-paste method and archived any threads older than 3 months (at the time). WP:ARCHIVE talks about the different ways we can go about this. Killiondude (talk) 05:09, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I was thinking the same thing Killion, lol. I dont think we need a system. This amount of discussion is rare for this article and is because of the articles explosive growth. I dont think the article will be seeing such explosive growth in the future since there are no regular editors of this article. Go ahead and archive this thing. Anon134 (talk) 08:53, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

So, I totally forgot about this thread. I read your response when I was at work on Friday, and I was going to do it when I got home (I usually only do very minor things on Wikipedia when I'm at work---things that don't take much time), but I forgot. Archive the whole page? I thought maybe everything from before February, but that's just slightly less than half of the page... Killiondude (talk) 07:33, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm just going to archive everything except for this thread. Killiondude (talk) 05:54, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

The Spokane

"The Spokane people share their culture and Salishan language with several other tribes, including the Coeur d' Alenes, Kalispels, Pend Oreilles, Flatheads, Kootenays, and Colvilles among others."

There is discussion on what tense the italicized word should be, past or present. I think it should be present since the Spokane tribe still exist and still have cultural ties to the other Native American tribes, but others believe that it should be past tense because it is in the history section. I would like to know what do others think should be done. Anon134 (talk) 22:18, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

This article is about the city, not the tribe. Is it even necessary to say the tribe shares their culture and language with the other tribes in the area? I'd be in favor of deleting the sentence. --Bobblehead ^(rants) 23:30, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

I think I agree with Bobblehead on this one. I was actually thinking the same thing, but Bobblehead beat me to it in terms of posting. The content of the sentence seems irrelevant in context of the surrounding text as the sentence in question doesn't support/develop any other point in the paragraph, nor are there points that develop the sentence. The sentence just seems to be like a foreign object floating in the water. The paragraph and history section (as written) are predominately showing the reader how the region got settled, and the sentence in question doesn't help that point. If this sentence is removed, the paragraph will flow better because it will go from discussing how the Falls were the tribe's center of trading to the white men trading with them (presumably near the falls).Jdubman (talk) 00:10, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, I dont think the sentence was irrelevant; the section was about how the Spokane area became populated and who populated the area. That sentence was a very quick "side bar" on who the first inhabitants were. But, since it is an isolated, awkward, sentence, I suppose it should be omitted in the main article. If people wanted to know who the Spokanes are, we should assume they would click the link to the Spokane tribe article. Anon134 (talk) 02:00, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Reference replacements

Ive checked out 2 books from the library on Spokane and replaced some sources with the book. Right now, Im trying to replace the following references with more reputable sources:

• "Timeline: 1873". City of Spokane. http://www.spokanecity.org/services/about/spokane/history/timeline/default.aspx?histid=17. Retrieved on 2008-12-19.

• a b c "Spokane (city)". Microsoft Encarta Online Encyclopedia. http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761564306/Spokane_(city).html. Retrieved on 2008-12-13.

--Only a and b I think should be replaced, esp. b though (it is a more detailed sentence and I would like that to be from a more reputable source).

Ideally, I would like these to be books because they look better to reviewers, they dont change, and they dont become dead links that I will have to find replacements for in the future. If you find some kind of Washington state specific history website or encyclopedia like HistoryLink, that will also suffice too. Any help is appreciated. When Im done working the section, Ill update the History of Spokane article as always. Thanks, Anon134 (talk) 04:26, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Status update

I have taken care of all significant possible reference problems that I can think of, and I have updated the side articles to reflect any new content changes in the main article, and I have put infoboxes and filled in missing info in all the pictures. I also have requested a Peer Review of the article from an editor. Its a good thing too, Ive pretty much run of out ideas on how to improve the main article or side articles further.

Plans/Goals: After this article is peer reviewed, I plan to fix the issues that come up and start an A-Class Review, and if that passes, then maybe give a FAC another go. Anon134 (talk) 20:03, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

OK, Im starting the Peer Review now. I didnt know I could start the peer review process myself, lol...thought I had to get an admin or someone else to do it. Im still a newbie :| 134.121.247.116 (talk) 18:35, 27 February 2009 (UTC)