Talk:Washington (state)

"bye and bye" vs. "by and by"

The state motto is listed as Alki (and source is listed at[ http://www1.leg.wa.gov/Legislature/StateSymbols/]). The translation at that cited source is "bye and bye," so the quotation is accurate, but I think that the correct phrase is "by and by." The alternative spelling is a common mistake (see [1]) I was going to change it, but since it's an accurate quote of the cited page... I elected to put it here instead. what do you all think? --Pballen (talk) 18:10, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I think you are right. This HistoryLink.org page might be a better source--it not only translates it as "by and by" but says, correctly, that the word comes from Chinook Jargon, instead of the vague "an Indian word" origin given by the wa.gov site. Pfly (talk) 02:08, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

"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)

Absolutely agreed. --Lukobe 05:42, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

(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)

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, [2], 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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

barneca is correct on point of what a "proper name" is. It sounds like people are introducing a fallacy by saying that "Washington State" is not correct because a) only proper names are capitalized and b) only "Washington" is the "proper" name. First off, I think that the structure of the logical argument itself is sound, but the problem here is that "proper name" is being semantically overloaded to become essentially a synonym for "official name," and yet a "proper name," in the context of (a), is entirely a grammatical concept. "Washington State" is in fact a "proper name"/proper noun in the purely grammatical sense of the term -- and a proper name need not be the "official" or canonical name for something (please do see even the Wikipedia page on the topic, for one). While some might consider it to be biased or politically loaded to use "Washington State," it is actually grammatically correct (and moreover, "Washington state" is grammatically *incorrect*, because it is a proper name, yet it is not capitalized).Christophre (talk) 19:31, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

All of those invested in this discussion have certainly done a lot of research to back up their arguments, but I've got to say - anytime I hear the word 'state' tagged on to the name 'Washington' the hairs on my neck stand up. I consider the fact that not one map ever produced adds the word 'state' to Washington, thus to add it is unnecessarily editorializing and relegating Washington to second-class citizenship among the other states. Conversely, Washington, D.C. already has a modifier. Previously when somebody asked where I was raised, I would simply say, "Washington." Inevitably the follow-up was, "State or D.C.?" I try not to be 'that guy' and very pleasantly say "There's only one Washington," and let them figure it out. And yes, I'm a nut. Now when asked where I come from, I answer, "About an hour North of Seattle," and that takes care of things nicely and I don't have to hear the dreaded title. I don't know why this bugs me so much, but it does. Things have names. I don't care about the tendencies of others in regards to how they choose to name something; Washington is the name of my home. Washington State is the name of a university therein. End of story. Finally, I wish the name of the state had been Columbia to avoid this confusion, but then everyone would probably think I had access to cocaine.Itramcj 13:48, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

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)

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)

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 Me}CASCADIA^Howl/_Trail 14:04, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Does the term reductio ad absurdum mean anything to you? George Washington may have gotten his surname from that city, but there wouldn't be anything else in the world with that name if he hadn't made it famous. Even the city of Washington, England's website attests to that. Jsc1973 (talk) 06:03, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

• Easy answer is see here: Wikipedia:Naming conventions, from the page is this: "This page in a nutshell: Generally, article naming should prefer what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature."

So, actually, using that, "Washington" should really direct you to "Washington D.C.", since the vast majority of the world thinks of that when they hear the word. But I'm not going to argue for that.

Any claims of "Ameri-co-centricity" make as much sense my claiming "British-co-centricity" that "Elizabeth II" takes you to the UK Queen rather than "Elisabeth II of Bohemia" who was born first. Fanra 05:25, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Well for one the name is spelt differently. The other is the pivotal role of the British royal family in the English speaking world. I don't know if wikipedia has any bias towards things to do with the English language, however there is a general acceptance of the corpus of 'English' things/ideas etc. In any case I'd never heard of the place in the UK (though I assumed Geo. Washington had an English geographical connection somehow). From my andtipodean experience Washington DC is well known whilst Washington State is not. Unless of course you are from the US. Ozdaren (talk) 12:16, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Washington should point to a disambiguation page.--SkiDragon (talk) 23:28, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. Most people outside the U.S. would be looking for Washington, D.C. if they typed just plain "Washington" into a search. The article on the state of Washington should be at Washington (state) and this should be a disambiguation page. Jsc1973 (talk) 06:03, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Yea Washington should be a disambiguation page just like Georgia.--Fomerom (talk) 14:59, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

I'd agree as well. There are just too many difernt things known by the name. People will type in looking for the city and the person. And yes, a few many even type in looking for Washington, Tyne and Wear. Lord Cornwallis (talk) 17:34, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

I've tried to move the state to Washington (U.S. state) and either make Washington a DAB or direct to the city. I've made no progress.--Loodog (talk) 18:01, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Concurred, I'm European and "Washington" means D.C. whenever someone discusses U.S. Politics here, in my experience, I'd imagine most of us who would type in "Washington" are looking for D.C.--Occono (talk) 17:04, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

I live in Washington state, and I fully support making this page a disambiguation. Not only is Washington, D.C. better known outside of the United States, I've regretably learned from multiple experiences of talking to various companies located in the north-eastern United States that D.C. is also the only one known to some people within the United States (ie: I've had multiple arguments about the existance of a state named Washington - being assured by the other party that I actually live in D.C. ... go figure). --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 21:33, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

See also section

I removed it. None of the links seem obviously useful to the general topic of Washington. Most were political or government pages which are better linked from political and government sub-pages. Conversely, a handful of political or government links in a see also section is an indiscriminate invitation to add others. Before adding a "see also" section, ask yourself: Can I make this a link in the text of a relevant section of the article? Would this link be better in a sub-page of another article instead? SchmuckyTheCat 17:19, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Closed for Edits

Perhaps this naive (I'm not much of a Wikipedia contributor, and don't really know the goings-on), but:

• Why is this article "locked"?
• Who was the final authority that decided that "Washington state" is preferred over "Washington State"? (I've added to the discussion, even though it seems to not have had any recent activity)
• Is the Chinook-English translation of "alki" as "bye and bye" perhaps a mispelling? "by and by" is definitely the correct spelling of the idiom meaning "eventually/at some point in the future" (Merriam-Webster; note that "bye and bye" is used here a search term that provides suggestions for valid entries)

Christophre (talk) 19:44, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

on the first one, are you talking about this article, it doesn't say it is protected
on the 3rd, that is a good question, The answer is as follows

"Al-ki or Alki is an Indian word meaning "bye and bye." This motto first appeared on the territorial seal designed by Lt. J.K. Duncan of Gov. Stevens' surveying expedition. On one side it pictures a log cabin and an immigrant wagon with a fir forest in the background; on the other side, a sheet of water being traversed by a steamer and sailing vessel, a city in perspective; the Goddess of Hope and an anchor is in the center. The figure points at the significant word "Alki." Settlers from the schooner Exact named their settlement on Alki Point, New York. The new settlement was slower to grow than its East Coast counterpart, however, so the name was changed to New York-Alki, meaning "into the future" -- the 1850s version of the term "bye and bye" or, "I will see you, bye and bye."" source: Washington.gov

-- GoldMan60 ¤ Talk  03:42, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

washington

Why do i get sent to Washington state instead of Washington DC when i type washington into wikipedia? it is obvious most people in the world who speak English refer to DC when speaking about washington. Even in the USA, some people say Washington state —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.238.152.3 (talk) 18:14, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

When you type in New York, it takes you to the article on New York state, same idea, most people in the world don't care/know that the state exists and are referring to New York City when they talk about New York, just because the state is usually not what the word refers to does not mean that it is not what the word is supposed to refer to. just because the majority of people do it does not make it fact Washington DCs name is and always has been Washington DC not Washington. I can tell you that the majority of people in the Northwestern USA NEVER refer to Washington DC as Washington, they always put the DC on there. Sorry if that was a little abrasive I'm tired and this is one of my pet peeves. Happy Editing --Gold Man60 Talk 03:44, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Military Bases

Somebody needs to add in the military bases section The Everett Naval Station Proud supporter of the NRA! 02:14, 12 July 2009 (UTC)