Talk:Utah

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article nominee Utah was a Geography and places good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
July 13, 2012 Good article nominee Not listed
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject United States / Utah (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Utah (marked as Top-importance).
 
WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mormonism and the Latter Day Saint movement on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.7 (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality scale.
Checklist icon
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
 
Note icon
This article is within of subsequent release version of Geography.
Taskforce icon
This article has been selected for Version 0.7 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia.


Dubious[edit]

The article claims that Utah is the only state where the majority belongs to one single church. It's sourced, but contradicted by other sources putting Rhode Island above 50% Catholic, while yet other sources has it as slightly below 50% when counting non-religious. It would be beneficial to find an additional source. Either this claim or claims about RI in other articles need to be rewritten, we cannot have it both ways.Jeppiz (talk) 00:42, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Can you provide links to the wikipedia articles and external reliable sources that you believe contradict the statement marked as dubious? The 63% number on Catholic Church in the United States appears to come from a 1990 survey found at Adherents.com - I'm betting that the source for that is the ARDA 1990 report. However, the 2010 report puts the percentage at ~44%. The numbers from the ARDA 2010 report for Utah put the LDS Church percentage at 69%. Based on those most recent numbers, I don't see the claim as dubious (at least with respect to RI), but maybe I'm overlooking some sources? --FyzixFighter (talk) 01:11, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks FyzixFighter, that appears to be accurate. I've removed the dubious tag.Jeppiz (talk) 15:26, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 7 external links on Utah. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Question? Archived sources still need to be checked

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:59, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Utah. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Question? Archived sources still need to be checked

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:25, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

1830s migration[edit]

"In the 1830s, thousands of migrants traveling from the Eastern United States to the American West began to make stops in the region of the Great Salt Lake, then known as Lake Youta.[citation needed]"

As far as I understand, until the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo of 1848, the "American West" was just the Oregon country. Salt Lake City does not appear to be a part of the Oregon trail, possibly because it was still in Mexico. I'm not sure if a citation exists for this one... maybe it should be removed? --Keith (Hypergeek14)Talk 03:41, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

pornography in utah[edit]

i just deleted the pornography text in the economy section because it has nothing to do with the utah economy. if anything, it's sociological. if someone wants to add a new section about culture or whatever, and add it, that'd be fine - but it's not part of utah's economy.

anyone want to add their two cents? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prefetch (talkcontribs) 20:47, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes. What people in Utah spend their money on is part of the economy, and being the largest consumer of any product is inherently notable. Restoring sourced content. ScrpIronIV 21:07, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
that study has many problems with it (eg. wasn't adjusted for population age) and it was pretty well discredited by the more recent 2013 pornhub study where utah came in 40th place in pornography consumption, as well as the google search term study. additionally, the standard deviation between "largest consumer" and "smallest consumer" in that study is tiny. so, help me understand why you think that a discredited study should be part of the economic section here? no other state wikipedia page has a section on pornography consumption - why do you think utah should have one? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prefetch (talkcontribs) 03:50, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
Simple - see above. It is notable, and reported as such. Now, if you want to add other data, that's fine - but removing appropriately sourced notable content is disruptive. Wikipedia does not perform the sort of original research as you have described to determine the viability of the study itself. ScrpIronIV 15:44, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
forget the original research. my contention is that this single, non-corroborated, contradicted source that likely has near zero effect on the actual utah economy should not be in a list characterizing utah's economy. i disagree with your declaration that it's "inherently notable". please explain why this disputed trivia should qualify to be part of utah's economy in wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prefetch (talkcontribs) 16:37, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
Restored to Status quo per WP:BRD - you are edit warring to remove sourced content. Please read the appropriate guidelines. ScrpIronIV 17:20, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
edit war is more than 3 edits in 24 hours. i haven't done that. are you willing to discuss this and answer my questions above, or not?
Clearly we disagree. You have provided no source that states this is a "disputed" study, or that it has been discredited. Your pointed to no specific evidence that it has been contradicted - just vague references to their existence. If there are newer studies, cite them, and add them. Start an RfC to gain a new consensus for removal. In the meantime, the status quo is maintained. ScrpIronIV 17:52, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
my primary point, that i stated at the very start of this thread, is that this is not relevant to the economy of utah, and as such, shouldn't even have a place in the economy section of this article. adding additional sources that contradict the source doesn't solve the issue. your only response so far has been that it's "inherently notable" and so it should be included, and it appears as though you aren't willing to discuss your assertion any further than that. i'm inviting you to do so. i'm happy to have a third opinion come in on this topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prefetch (talkcontribs) 18:00, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
I read through the arguments here, as well as read the Utah article again and articles for other states. After all that, it's clear to me that this portion does not make sense to be included on this page at all, let alone in the Economy section. It was originally added on 9 Jan 2010 by an anonymous user under the Entertainment section. The inclusion of this disputed assertion appears to be subjective and have been done by someone with a personal agenda. It is not noteworthy, nor does it appear to be a credible fact. - Mozmac —Preceding undated comment added 22:33, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
okay, so we've got a WP:3O here that believes the pornography text does not belong in the economy portion of this article. as per wikipedia guidelines, i'm considering this dispute resolved and i'm going to go ahead and remove the text. if you disagree with 3O, you can escalate it with an admin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prefetch (talkcontribs) 19:32, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
ScrpIron please stop reverting this edit and please use the talk page to discuss this. simply reverting the edit is not productive and is not in line with the spirit of wikipedia. Prefetch (talk) 15:18, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Indeed, start an RfC or an ACTUAL WP:3O. In the meantime, the status quo is maintained. ScrpIronIV 15:23, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
i would have hoped we could have discussed it more, and since you've ignored the informal third opinion and refuse to discuss it further, i've gone ahead and requested a formal WP:3O. Prefetch (talk) 15:34, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
I agree with Mozmac. This shouldn't be included here, and certainly not in the economy section. I doubt pornography consumption has any appreciable effect on Utah's GDP or economy. If it did, I'd like to see a reference saying that first. Until then, this random trivia tidbit shouldn't be here. It shouldn't be included in the Utah page at all. Perhaps it might warrant a mention in some American pornography page. FuriouslySerene (talk) 15:50, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
I just came across this by accident. This is the main article on Utah, for heaven's sake. Take it out. Zerotalk 18:41, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
3rd Opinion Request Greetings, all. A third opinion was requested on this dispute; however, since there are four editors substantially involved, I'm afraid I have to decline the formal request. If more formal dispute resolution is required, I would suggest using an WP:RFC or posting at WP:DRN. I would make two points in passing, however; first that this should be turned into a binary dispute over inclusion/non-inclusion, but should discuss how something is presented (or not); second, that all parties would do well to read WP:DUE, which I would paraphrase as saying that "all points of view in reliable secondary sources should be presented duly weighted" (emphasis mine). Regards, Vanamonde93 (talk) 18:51, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
thank you Vanamonde93. we now have 4 editors that are in agreement, which i think is reasonable to call a consensus. if ScrpIron continues to dispute this we can escalate to a WP:RFC but it hardly seems necessary when we have a clear consensus already. i'm taking the section out as agreed upon by Zero, Mozmac, FuriouslySerene and myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prefetch (talkcontribs) 19:05, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Agree with removal - unless it's a major sector of the state's economy it doesn't belong on a general article about the state. (Even if it's true... and that's a big 'if' considering the methods of this "study"). AlexiusHoratius 19:31, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and removed the content. There appears to be consensus here it shouldn't be included. FuriouslySerene (talk) 20:06, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

  • Do not include as WP:UNDUE: porn fruition that's slightly higher than other states (the article itself states, with source, that the study's authors are "quick to admit" there isn't really a significant difference among various US states) does not really warrant a mention, nevermind a long paragraph, as part of a state's Economy section. LjL (talk) 21:05, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Utah. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Question? Archived sources still need to be checked

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:05, 16 July 2016 (UTC)