Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geography

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Geography (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography 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.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 

CfD on Category:Rivers of the Boundary Ranges etc[edit]

See Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2014_April_17#Category:Rivers_of_the_Boundary_Ranges on the Categories for discussion page.

Mass consolidation of geography stubs[edit]

So it seems like nearly a third of the encyclopedia is composed of a bunch of geographic place stubs, and pretty much none them are ever going to have any sort of notability. Shouldn't these kinds of articles just be merged into larger articles based on a higher jurisdiction, such as "List of places in X district"?--Prisencolinensinainciusol (talk) 01:31, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

It is our intention to eventually fill out all of these geographic stubs. Small communities and geographic features usually don't have resident advocates, so it is up to geography, geology, and history editors to fill the void. Yours aye,  Buaidh  15:08, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
In the mean time, can't they just get merged together until there's enough content to split them off? I mean it'll just be a lot easier to navigate that way. Besides, it's not explicitly stated at WP:NOT, but it doesn't seem like Wikipedia is supposed to be some platform for the advocacy of farflung communities across the world. (Edit: Actually it seems like there's WP:NOTADVOCATE)--Prisencolinensinainciusol (talk) 22:29, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
A place doesn't have to be big to be considered notable. In England, any place that is a civil parish is considered notable - and some civil parishes have less than 100 residents. I'm not sure that consolidating such small entries is more helpful than having them as stand-alone articles.PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 09:11, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
The current guideline for Australia as I understand it is that any legally-defined town/suburb/locality is by definition "notable" and could have its own article. Places that only used to be separate are noted that way in the government gazetteers, and are generally covered by the article for the current address. It would be theoretically possible to aggregate these into the next larger legal entity (local government area), but this would tend to lead to undue emphasis in the wrong places. Perhaps we need to be more precise on when to remove "stub-status" from a small article. If a place article has cited sources for being on a road, a railway, and having a former politician born there, with an infobox and a photo, is it still a stub? What if it only has 2 out of three? or only one of those? --Scott Davis Talk 12:01, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

RfC on removal of native state names from article lead sentences[edit]

There was an RfC opened that might affect tens of articles. Your opinions would be welcome. WarKosign 05:33, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

WP:USPLACE and Guam[edit]

Does WP:USPLACE article naming guideline apply to the U.S. territory of Guam ? See Talk:Dededo, Guam for the discussion -- 70.51.203.69 (talk) 02:47, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Apparently it does, seeing as Hagåtña, Guam is named as such instead of Hagåtña--Prisencolinensinainciusol (talk) 01:13, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Listing all the rivers of a country in the category "Rivers of [Country]"[edit]

There is an ongoing debate in Category talk:Rivers of Spain, on which is the best solution:

  • either listing all the rivers of a country in the category "Rivers of [Country]," as for example in France and Portugal,
  • or including them only in sub-categories and listing the rivers in list pages, as for example in the United Kingdom, the USA, Ireland and Germany.

I think a global solution should be adopted, so that all the countries have a consistent categorization. --Xabier Armendaritz(talk) 16:15, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

"Cape of Good Hope"[edit]

The usage and primary topic of Cape of Good Hope is currently under discussion at multiple locations, see the multiple conflicting discussions at Talk:Cape of Good Hope (landmark) and Talk:Cape Colony -- 70.51.203.69 (talk) 04:27, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

RfC at Talk:Balochistan, Pakistan[edit]

Comments requested at Talk:Balochistan,_Pakistan#RFC_do-over.

Article is a general overview of the Balochistan region. The dispute seems to be about whether any content about insurgencies, human rights violations, etc. belong in this article.

Arguments against inclusion seem to center on POV, UNDUE and COATRACK. Some have argued that since articles exists at Balochistan conflict and Human rights violations in Balochistan, no summary of these subjects should exist at Balochistan, Pakistan. Instead, links to the relevant articles should be added to the See also section.

Arguments for inclusion center on insurgency and human rights violations being intrinsically tied to the history, government and culture of the region, so including a brief summary of the subjects and links to the main articles is proposed to be reasonable.

Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:29, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi, comments still requested at Talk:Balochistan,_Pakistan#RFC_do-over. Thank you, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:32, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Proposal for a new WikiProject[edit]

Hello there, I have just proposed a new WikiProject be started; National Parks of the United Kingdom and I was wondering whether you would be able to come and have a look at the proposal and join the discussion. Thanks for looking.  Seagull123  Φ  15:02, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Pluto-Charon system[edit]

We are having a discussion at WT:AST about the newfound geography of Pluto and Charon. -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 05:15, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

List of geological features on Pluto[edit]

Does this list of surface features fall under WPGEOGRAPHY? -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 05:17, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Palena/General Vintter Lake[edit]

There is a request move discussion here for Palena/General Vintter LakeVintter Lake. --Bejnar (talk) 19:04, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

New wikiproject proposal: Information Visualisation[edit]

I'm proposing a new Wikiproject focussed on information visualisation. Since it has a some relation to this project, I'm adding a notification here. If you're interested, come and help brainstorm over here --> Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals/Information_Visualisation --naught101 (talk) 02:29, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

"Palestine"[edit]

The usage and primary topic of Palestine is under discussion, see talk:Palestine (disambiguation) -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 04:17, 20 August 2015 (UTC)