Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the WikiProject Cities page.
|Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19|
|This page is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot II. Threads with no replies in 90 days may be automatically moved.|
Sister cities of Paris and Rome
A user by the name of ZH8000 has set about trying to enforce a point that the cities of Paris and Rome are "exclusive twin cities" and therefore cannot be listed as a sister city on any other article. I first noticed their edits of the Tokyo and Kyoto articles, and have since observed they have also edited articles related to Seoul, Jakarta, Beijing, London and Berlin. I stopped looking when I found that many, but they've probably edited the article of every city listed at Paris#International relations and Rome#International relations. Their argument appears to be that if these two cities have an "exclusive twin" relationship, then referring to a relationship with any other city as a "sister city relationship" is not permitted. My view is that a twin relationship with one entity does not prohibit a sibling relationship with other entities. By way of analogy, people who are twins can have other siblings too. The governments of Paris and Rome seem adamant about their "exclusive twin" relationship; that's fine. But I do not see the need to whitewash every other article of cities that describe their relationship with Rome or Paris as being one of "sisters". I'm seeking further comments on this issue. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 02:42, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
- Yup, noticed that as well. Paris & Rome seem to be claiming this unique relationship, but then you got Tokyo or Chicago which if memory serves simply list Paris as a sister city, no qualifications, ifs or buts. I suppose mentioning this on the Paris and Rome pages is the lesser of two evils – but still the problem of others claiming twinning w/ P. or R. remains – but singling out Paris and hammering in some sort of a special snowflake relationship on other cities' pages feels like giving undue weight to a bit of a trivia that doesn't warrant it (and, that goes against some of the references, e.g. Tokyo, Chicago).
- I feel as if simply rebranding the 'sister city' sections into 'partnerships' or something like that would be the most elegant solution. 'This city has these twins or partner cities or whatever: A, B, C...' Like Prague or Tokyo. Also the whole 'sister city' thing seems very nebulous and intangible at best to begin with, some cities have a 'sister city' section but their website only talks about partnerships. Or it seems like their language/customs/culture don't have a 'sister city' equivalent or consider it synonymous with a partnership (CZE/Prague seems that way) or whatever. --CCCVCCCC (talk) 08:23, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Talk:Utqiaġvik, Alaska#Move to change name of article to "Utqiagvik, Alaska" following newly approved ordinance
This article was moved from Barrow, Alaska while a move discussion was ongoing with no consensus achieved, apparently solely based on this or similar stories, without regard for WP:COMMONNAME or the fact that we're still a ways off from it being official. More discussion is welcome. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 22:28, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
According to wp:WikiProject Ottawa its parent is this WikiProject. However when I look at wp:WikiProject_Cities#Article_alerts I do not see wp:WikiProject_Ottawa#Article_alerts included which is a big problem for the small semi-active Ottawa wikiproject, because most articles nominated end up being deleted with very little participation. Anyone know how this can be fixed? Thank in advance, Ottawahitech (talk)please ping me
- Ottawahitech without looking at the technical side of things (I'm sure it is possible), from a practical point of view it sounds very problematic. If the article alerts included the alerts for Ottawa, then they would have to include the alerts for every city in the world. That would make it a very long list which very few people would bother trawling through. Also, I think it would be outside the scope of this project, which is supposed to be about articles on cities themselves, not every article that is somehow related to a city. Finally, this project does not seem to be very active either (less than 100 edits to this page in a year), so I think the Canada project would be a better place for you to be seeking wider involvement. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 03:07, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
- Considering that over 28% of the 325 articles you have created have been deleted (you keep a running total on your talk page) perhaps I could suggest you submit your draft articles for review before they go live, and you familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's notability policies. This might free up the time of your fellow editors to more fully participate in other AFD discussions. Just a suggestion. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:39, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
- Hi, @Magnolia677: long time no see. Thanks for compiling the percentage above, I had no idea 28% of the articles I created have been deleted. I think you make a good point about not wasting other editors' time. Could you please share with us where you got this information? I don’t believe % is on my userpage. Thanks for taking the time, and please don't forget to ping me. Ottawahitech (talk) 14:54, 29 November 2016 (UTC)please ping me
- @Magnolia677: Of course no offence taken, I do not normally get asked questions such as yours and I do appreciate the opportunity to provide my side of the story.
- Now having said that, I would like to stress that it is not easy to defend one’s actions when one is attacked from all sides by several editors with few coming to help. It makes it almost impossible to contribute content here when one has to not only to write an article, but also to constantly defend content whether it was written by one or by others, make sure others get to see it, etc. etc.
- I was fortunate enough to get fantastic help on Trump Towers Pune an article I started last week which went up for deletion on wp:AfD within a couple of hours of creation. It is now on its last legs so you may want to rush over to see what kind of material is being removed from public view before it disappears for good. Also if you have the time you may want to check the View stats on the AFD to verify that hardly anyone is paying attention to what is going on.
2016 Community Wishlist Survey Proposal to Revive Popular Pages
Greetings WikiProject Cities Members!
This is a one-time-only message to inform you about a technical proposal to revive your Popular Pages list in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:
If the above proposal gets in the Top 10 based on the votes, there is a high likelihood of this bot being restored so your project will again see monthly updates of popular pages.
Further, there are over 260 proposals in all to review and vote for, across many aspects of wikis.
Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.
Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 17:57, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Deletion discussion of category: mayors of X
FYI please see: Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2016_December_11#Category:Mayors_of_Langley.2C_British_Columbia_.2. Ottawahitech (talk) 19:52, 15 December 2016 (UTC)please ping me