User talk:SounderBruce/Archive 38

This is an archive of past discussions with SounderBruce. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

< Archive 37

Archive 38

Archive 39 >

All Pages:

1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10 - 11 - 12 - 13 - 14 - 15 - 16 - 17 - 18 - 19 - 20 - 21 - 22 - 23 - 24 - 25 - 26 - 27 - 28 - 29 - 30 - 31 - 32 - 33 - 34 - 35 - 36 - 37 - 38 - 39 - 40 - 41 - 42 - 43 - 44 - 45 - ... (up to 100)

Music of Olympia

Hi I appreciate your edits amongst this Wikipedia page but just wondering what you meant by your comments. I am a university student who is trying to complete an assignment. I don't mind if you change many things but you completely changed my assignment. Just wondering what your intentions where in doing this. If you could wait till the 6th of June 2021 till edits that would be much appreciated. thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Livm333 (talk • contribs) 07:36, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Livm333: Your edits did not meet the basic standards laid out in Wikipedia's policies on original research and citing sources. As this is an article in the mainspace, as opposed to draftspace or a user sandbox, you should expect other editors to come by and correct anything out of place, no matter when it is. Sounder Bruce 07:21, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MLS Cup Champions Table

Hello,

Is this a credible source for the table I created? ---> https://www.worldfootball.net/winner/usa-major-league-soccer/

As I mentioned on my edit the previous table has a very uninformative design so I tried to make it like the tables for other major sporting competitions, where you can actually see all of the years the team reached (and won) the championship rather than just having the most recent win and loss.

Also the appearances by team table is pretty much just presenting the information from the top table in a different way.

Thanks,

SirSeruum

(Side Note: The table that is currently on the wikipedia page does not have a proper citation either as the page linked no longer exists.)

@SirSeruum: Generally, stats repositories like that are not appropriate sources, especially for a featured list. The existing source (which I need to fish an archived copy of) is the league's official records book, which is the best source possible. Trying to shoehorn far too much information into that table would be in violation of WP:NOTSTATS. Sounder Bruce 21:51, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there's any argument that listing the seasons is excessive or repetitive information. Take a look at the Super Bowl and World Series' wiki pages, imagine how pointless it would be if those pages only listed the most recent win and most recent loss for each team. Its much better from the reader's perspective to be able to easily see which years any given team were in the Cup and which years they had won the Cup as well as the sequence of wins and losses. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SirSeruum (talk • contribs) 01:56, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SirSeruum: It's still redundant to MLS Cup#MLS Cup titles. Neither of your examples are recent FLs, and this list passed FLC without needing the extra cruft. Sounder Bruce 04:08, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Santa Clarita good article nomination

On Talk:Santa Clarita, California/GA1 you posted on June 3 (PDT) that you "will review [the article] in the coming days." It has been 11 days and you still have not posted anything on the nomination page. Do you have any comments so far? Crossover1370 (talk | contribs) 02:44, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Crossover1370: Sorry about the delay, I've been a bit busy this past week and haven't been able to write up my comments. I should be able to get to it soon, but well within the normal window for a GAN. Sounder Bruce 06:22, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GAN Backlog Drive - July 2021

Good article nominations \| July 2021 Backlog Drive
July 2021 Backlog Drive: This Thursday, July 1, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number, length, and age, of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 10+ good article reviews or participated in the March backlog drive. Click here to opt out of any future messages. --Usernameunique

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:31, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2021 July newsletter

The third round of the 2021 WikiCup has now come to an end. Each of the sixteen contestants who made it into the fourth round had at least 294 points, and our top six scorers all had over 600 points. They were:

The Rambling Man, with 1825 points from 3 featured articles, 44 featured article reviews, 14 good articles, 30 good article reviews and 10 DYKs. In addition, he completed a 34-article good topic on the EFL Championship play-offs.
Epicgenius, a New York specialist, with 1083 points from 2 featured article reviews, 18 good articles, 30 DYKs and plenty of bonus points.
Bloom6132, with 869 points from 11 DYKs, all with bonus points, and 54 "In the news" items, mostly covering people who had recently died.
Gog the Mild, with 817 points from 3 featured articles on historic battles in Europe, 5 featured article reviews and 3 good articles.
Hog Farm, with 659 points from 2 featured articles and 2 good articles on American Civil War battles, 18 featured article reviews, 2 good articles, 6 good article reviews and 4 DYKs.
BennyOnTheLoose, a snooker specialist and new to the Cup, with 647 points from a featured article, 2 featured article reviews, 6 good articles, 6 good article reviews and 3 DYKs.

In round three, contestants achieved 19 featured articles, 7 featured lists, 106 featured article reviews, 72 good articles, 1 good topic, 62 good article reviews, 165 DYKs and 96 ITN items. We enter the fourth round with scores reset to zero; any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (one contestant in round 3 lost out because of this). When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Judges: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:30, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for Creation July 2021 Backlog Elimination Drive

Hello SounderBruce:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running until 31 July 2021.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
There is currently a backlog of over 1000 articles, so start reviewing articles. We're looking forward to your help!

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for Creation at 21:54, 7 July 2021 (UTC). If you do not wish to recieve future notification, please remove your name from the mailing list.[reply]

ITN recognition for 2021 Copa América Final

On 14 July 2021, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2021 Copa América Final, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. PFHLai (talk) 21:14, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

POV Tag on Omari Salisbury

Hi SounderBruce, can you please list the reasons/issues with neutral tone that prompted the addition of the POV tag on Omari Salisbury on the talk page? thank you MAMIjams (talk) 18:49, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Help me with a article

Hi Bruce! It’s User: Gonzafer001 I’m still learning how to use this app. Is it possible to bring to a vote (again) regarding the notability of Bellingham Metro News? The Newspaper it self has more coverage then the newspapers and other alt media that was listed on the media section of Bellingham, Washington. I had to clear some of them off the list because they don’t even exist, or never existed in the first place. Please take a second look, or even put it together yourself and then put it to a vote between you and other Wiki Users, you don’t even have to create an article, just have it listed with the other "local media", or even create a separate "local media" section under "media" if there is a possible way to do that. There are websites with lesser notability such as "Whatcom Watch" listed on there.

The AS review and Bellingham Business News were listed on there until I clicked their domains and realized that they don’t exist, I even check the Wayback Machine.

Bruce, please help me out with this one, I’ve refrained from posting politics to the page since 2020, I’ve done all local reporting, I like to show off the Whatcom County area. Give me a chance, please.. I know I’ve been bugging you since like 2017 on here.. haha! I just need some help with this website. I finally figured out how to use the Talk Pages. Fernando Gonzalez 08:51, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

@Gonzafer001: it was deleted via WP:AfD. That's articles for deletion, and there's no way to have a discussion on an article that doesn't exist. I see that Draft:Bellingham Metro News now exists and that it has been nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Bellingham Metro News. And you don't simply have a conflict of interest, you are a WP:PAID editor and as you haven't stated that your creation of the draft is against our terms of service. Doug Weller talk 12:01, 5 August 2021 (UTC) And I just noticed that SounderBruce told you this 2 years ago and you still haven't done it. Doug Weller talk 12:02, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

But what if I own Bellingham Metro News and is a non profit corporation. I’m not employed by the company, does that make a difference? Fernando Gonzalez 18:13, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Okay, understood. I’ll stop asking. Sorry. Fernando Gonzalez 18:17, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

On the removal of content in the page "Copa America 2021 Final".

Hello! Can you please let me know why the addition of about the latest meeting between Brazil and Argentina prior to the 2021 final in the Copa America was removed from the page. Thanks in advance. Malignant Cell (talk) 04:19, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Malignant Cell, your addition used a questionable source (Goal.com) and wasn't particularly needed. Trivia has to be pruned. Sounder Bruce 04:35, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Thanks for responding. But the evidence of the mentioned statement can already be viewed in the Wikipedia itself. Majority of the tournament final pages are containing a brief details of the two participants latest meetings. This was not just a trivia as per several other pages on similar cup finals. Malignant Cell (talk) 09:28, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sounders - playoff appearance record

If you dislike the citation how do you feel about me leaving in the fact without a citation? I think it is incredibly amazing that the Sounder's have set the all-time record for playoff appearances in their initial seasons in the league. I could use the playoff statistic page on wikipedia as the citation, but the source I linked to is more accurate than the wikipedia version and is always up to date. The official mls page is also out of date. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Birkedit (talk • contribs)

@Birkedit: The citation is from an unreliable source, and is wholly unsuitable for a Featured article, as would citing another Wikipedia entry. Citations in the lead are also not required per WP:LEADCITE. I don't think the record is worth mentioning in the lead (which needs to be kept a short and simple summary), and an updated source can easily be found by narrowing down news articles from around playoffs season, so there is no urgent need to add anything. (Also, be sure to sign your comments). Sounder Bruce 06:20, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Re: American club names

Hi, I am not sure if that is correct. From my understanding, if the club is not another version of old club (like Seattle Sounders FC, Orlando City SC etc.) or not just the city name (like New York City FC and Los Angeles FC), you remove the suffix. There was no Atlanta United and the club name isn't just the city "FC". Same with sides like Chicago Fire, Houston Dynamo, and Inter Miami. Is there a past discussion where the ultimate consensus was that this was the way for all American soccer clubs? Like, what about USL Championship sides like Pittsburgh Riverhounds, Birmingham Legion, Louisville City, Memphis 901, OKC Energy, Colorado Springs Switchbacks etc. Look at the player infobox's, they all remove the suffix. --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 22:03, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArsenalFan700, we had this discussion last year at WT:FOOTY (see here) and elsewhere in the archives. There is a long-standing consensus (dating back to 2009) to use the full name of the club to prevent confusion with non-MLS incarnations (as is the case for Seattle and Orlando, among others), but it just hasn't been properly enforced on player pages. Sounder Bruce 22:48, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion you linked didn't have a consensus besides maybe having New York City FC remain the same. The only team clubs like Atlanta United were mentioned was to put it without the FC. You're also saying that there is a long-standing consensus, can you please link it for me? I have tried to look, I have checked the archives at both Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/United States and Canada task force and even the talk page for the Vancouver Whitecaps and I can't find anything resembling an actual consensus. --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 23:25, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArsenalFan700, we'll need a formal RfC then. Most MLS articles written with consistency in mind do retain the suffix, in following with what the press and league use. Sounder Bruce 06:02, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've mainly seen Atlanta United done without the suffix to be fair. Same with Orlando City and Houston Dynamo. Hell, just do a Google search comparison and Atlanta United is six times more searchable than Atlanta United FC. Even the league just uses Atlanta United. I personally don't think there is a problem. Have the clubs who are simply "City FC/SC" or "FC City" have the full name used, have the teams which have two words in their name like Atlanta United, Orlando City, Houston Dynamo drop the FC/SC like usual with football names, and for clubs which are continuations of previous clubs like "Seattle Sounders FC" or "Minnesota United FC", use the FC. It is similar to how we do clubs with the same name in South America and Europe (like with Xavier Arreaga using Barcelona SC), mind, I wouldn't mind dropping the suffix for them as well, considering the league does that as well. I agree though, we need a formalized Rfc to really decide. We need something along the lines of German club names they have at the Germany task force. --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 16:05, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArsenalFan700, it helps to see what national outlets like SI, ESPN, and Soccer America use, as it establishes a COMMONNAME. Also, Houston only recently switched to a name with FC, so they can't really be included in this discussion. Sounder Bruce 23:55, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All three of those outlets interchange but mainly drop the suffix. You want to start the formalized discussion though? You started by saying that there is a consensus. Obviously, that is not true, so let's start one. --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 07:55, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Interstate 5 wiki page

Hello! I got the message that my 2 edits were removed on the Interstate 5 wiki, and I think it was a mistake. Both Washingvton State routes 4 and 432 both connect at Interstate 5. On SR 432 it connects to I-5 via a ramp and SR 4 connects with I 5 via exits (Exit 39) Thanks! CltzC (talk) 01:47, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

CltzC, the Major junctions list for summary articles like Interstate 5 are only meant to list a handful of junctions, usually with other Interstates and U.S. Routes alongside a few very important state highways. SR 4 and SR 432 are both covered by the junctions list for the state-detail article. Please consider using spell-check to fix grammatical errors before submitting edits in the future. Sounder Bruce 02:11, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment

I here to request for opinion regarding Great Highway page. Currently there a issue were i trying seek a even compromise, but to me its like it stuck with no compromise resolution. This is about the current status of the roadway. Centralist2021 (talk) 04:25, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you...

...for cleaning up after Nasitasa (now blocked as sock). David notMD (talk) 15:06, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2021 September newsletter

The fourth round of the competition has finished with over 500 points being required to qualify for the final round. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants, The Rambling Man and Epicgenius, each scoring over 3000 points, and six contestants scoring over 1000. All but one of the finalists achieved one or more FAs during the round, the exception being Bloom6132 who demonstrated that 61 "in the news" items produces an impressive number of points. Other contestants who made it to the final are Gog the Mild, Lee Vilenski, BennyOnTheLoose, Amakuru and Hog Farm. However, all their points are now swept away and everyone starts afresh in the final round.

Round 4 saw the achievement of 18 featured articles and 157 good articles. Bilorv scored for a 25-article good topic on Black Mirror but narrowly missed out on qualifying for the final round. There was enthusiasm for FARs, with 89 being performed, and there were 63 GARs and around 100 DYKs during the round. As we start round 5, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it to the final round; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. For other contestants, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.

If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:02, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of MLS Cup 2020

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article MLS Cup 2020 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Nova Crystallis -- Nova Crystallis (talk) 15:41, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reverts

Why did you revert my edits? NW1223_{(Howl at me|My hunts)} 22:47, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

NightWolf1223, check the page history. Your edit left the statement without a citation and you added a redundant link to a dab page. Sounder Bruce 22:48, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

But the citation was dead. NW1223_{(Howl at me|My hunts)} 22:49, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, I'm dumb. Sorry for the inconvenience. NW1223_{(Howl at me|My hunts)} 22:53, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Washington State Route 971

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Washington State Route 971 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 420Traveler -- 420Traveler (talk) 05:01, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Washington State Route 971

The article Washington State Route 971 you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Washington State Route 971 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 420Traveler -- 420Traveler (talk) 16:40, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DSTT

Resolved

I've re-added my changes to the DSTT article after including the citations for the stub tunnel from elsewhere on the page---I believe that was the unsourced statement that you were referring to. The rest of the content should have been a pure rearrangement of what was already in the "Route and Stations" section --Compsig (talk) 23:44, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Compsig: The section was laid out to describe the basic station layouts first and then go into detail in north-south order. I've reverted your addition again because it doesn't fit the general flow of the section. A featured article generally should not undergo major changes without consensus from other editors, usually by leaving a proposal on the article talk page. Sounder Bruce 23:53, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough about not wanting to have a major revision without consensus, but I'm not sure what you mean by my having changed the general flow. I was just trying to fix the following clear factual errors:

The first sentence implies that the twin bores are 1.3 miles long, when the primary source^[1] (the wrong source is cited in the sentence for that matter) doesn't support this—the entire length of the tunnel, including the cut and cover portion between Westlake and CP is what the article appears to refer to.
The second sentence refers to the "three middle stations." This is no longer consistent with the previous sentence stating that the DSTT runs between Westlake and ID/Chinatown.
Moreover, the variable-message signs referred to in the second sentence are present at all five of the original stations, not just the three fully underground ones.
Sentence 5 misrepresents the primary source^[1] (and is obviously wrong)—the primary source states that the *twin bores* are located 60 ft below street level, not the four remaining stations. Even if it was referring to stations, this is clearly false for ID/Chinatown.

Fnally, this one is admittedly more of a stylistic choice, but it would seem to me that the technical features of the stations (entrances, elevators, signs/wayfinding, platforms/tracks) should be grouped together instead of being split by the sentence about station artwork. --Compsig (talk) 00:45, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ ^a ^b Crowley, Walt (October 1, 2000). "Metro Transit begins excavating downtown Seattle transit tunnel on March 6, 1987". HistoryLink. Archived from the original on October 19, 2016. Retrieved April 17, 2011.

Your GA nomination of Washington State Route 971

The article Washington State Route 971 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Washington State Route 971 for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 420Traveler -- 420Traveler (talk) 01:21, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats! ----Another Believer _(Talk) 01:53, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Wyoming Highway 257

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Wyoming Highway 257 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 10:21, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MLS Cup 1996 scheduled for TFA

This is to let you know that the MLS Cup 1996 article has been scheduled as today's featured article for October 20, 2021. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 20, 2021, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.

For Featured Articles promoted recently, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.

We suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:03, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Wyoming Highway 257

The article Wyoming Highway 257 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Wyoming Highway 257 for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 10:01, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

On the Portland, Oregon Edits

Hey, one of my edits on Portland Oregon concerning the statues in Portland was removed. I am just wondering what part of my edit was seen as "Less than neutral". Just curious so I don't make the same mistake in the future. Thanks! Rockygun1233 (talk) 21:12, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

West Duwamish Greenbelt

Hi. Thanks for your message about my recently started article on West Duwamish Greenbelt. I have to say, I thought I'd rephrased the websites enough to avoid breaching copyright, but it seems that this isn't the case. Please could you give me some advice on how to proceed from here. Should I engage in further rephrasing, or do something else? I'd really appreciate some guidance here. Thanks in advance for your help; you can reply to me here or on my own Talk page. RomanSpa (talk) 19:08, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I'm guessing from your name that you're an expert on the Seattle area; are you able to help with any better references than those I've already found? Thanks. RomanSpa (talk) 19:08, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@RomanSpa: I've been collecting sources for the same subject for a while and still struggle to find anything worthwhile in The Seattle Times (besides the one tree-cutting incident), so I'm afraid it wouldn't be notable enough for a standalone article. I would recommend trying to incubate it in draftspace, since there's not much out there about the greenbelt in general. Sounder Bruce 23:47, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA

I'm just seeing when you will start reviewing Pierson, Iowa. I'm only asking because it's been several days. SL93 (talk) 16:12, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SL93: Sorry about that. I've been a bit busy IRL and will have time in the next few days. Sounder Bruce 04:09, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why insta-fail without giving me an option to fix the issues? You also have to understand that once I add those sections, they won't be as long as huge city. There are only a few hundred people there. SL93 (talk) 01:45, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You basically wasted my time for over a week and a half. Why even pick it up and the other one that you insta-failed today? It seems like a lot of those issues are things that you could have spotted without a deep-down review. SL93 (talk) 01:51, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of MLS Cup 2020

The article MLS Cup 2020 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:MLS Cup 2020 for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Nova Crystallis -- Nova Crystallis (talk) 06:41, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Washington State Route 121

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Washington State Route 121 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 09:40, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Wyoming Highway 257

On 3 October 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Wyoming Highway 257, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that construction of Wyoming Highway 257 was delayed for several years by an eminent domain lawsuit? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Wyoming Highway 257. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Wyoming Highway 257), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Washington State Route 121

The article Washington State Route 121 you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Washington State Route 121 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 18:40, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Washington State Route 971

On 4 October 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Washington State Route 971, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Washington State Route 971 is the highest-numbered state highway in Washington? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Washington State Route 971. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Washington State Route 971), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Washington State Route 121

The article Washington State Route 121 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Washington State Route 121 for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 13:21, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Interstate 180 (Nebraska)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Interstate 180 (Nebraska) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of GhostRiver -- GhostRiver (talk) 16:20, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Interstate 180 (Nebraska)

The article Interstate 180 (Nebraska) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Interstate 180 (Nebraska) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of GhostRiver -- GhostRiver (talk) 16:40, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Interstate 180 (Nebraska)

The article Interstate 180 (Nebraska) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Interstate 180 (Nebraska) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of GhostRiver -- GhostRiver (talk) 19:41, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

TFA

Thank you today for MLS Cup 1996, introduced: "It's almost playoffs season for Major League Soccer, so I thought it would be appropriate to try and bring the first-ever MLS Cup to featured status. The pitch was soggy from storms trailing a hurricane and had strong winds, but it didn't stop D.C. United from taking the first of seven trophies that they won during their run of dominance at the turn of the millennium."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:37, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Portland Union Station

Respectfully, I would disagree that all connections should be listed instead of just those integrated into the station. Greyhound and FlixBus, for example, stop on NW Station Way a couple blocks north of the station, which is misleading and could potentially inconvenience travelers who have never visited the station before, especially if the passenger has a mobility limitation. Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by IclancyODOT (talk • contribs) 18:32, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@IclancyODOT: The specifics of where each service is located can be mentioned in the prose. The infobox is merely meant to convey a general overview and is governed by the standards agreed upon by WP:TRAINS. "Connecting services" can mean any notable service that is within a reasonable transfer distance. Sounder Bruce 21:56, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Interstate 180 (Nebraska)

On 26 October 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Interstate 180 (Nebraska), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that reconstruction of Nebraska's Interstate 180 was disrupted by the discovery of nesting migratory birds? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Interstate 180 (Nebraska). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Interstate 180 (Nebraska)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Myrtle Edwards (politician)

Saw the notes and I didn't know about this process, and I was quite pleasantly surprised. I appreciate you nominating the article. I did some copy edits to the article hopefully to address some of the notes, although I wasn't aware of the jargons to be quite honest. Anyway, took a stab at them but thought I'd reach out. Would be honoured to get your insights and would appreciate your guidance on how else I can improve these articles since I like to work on the Women in Red. Many thanks. ---WomenProj (talk) 20:58, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, whilst we're in this subject. Do you think Graynella Packer would make a good DYK? with this being hook? "Graynella Packer was the first female radiotelegraph (wireless) operator to make overnight voyages on an ocean-going vessel" --WomenProj (talk) 21:08, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@WomenProj: Packer's article is not eligible for DYK, as it has to be nominated within 10 days of a major expansion or being promoted to GA status. I would also recommend following the MOS more closely and mimicking the style used in existing articles. Sounder Bruce 02:21, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SounderBruce: Makes sense. Many thanks for your help. --WomenProj (talk) 13:34, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies

I promise not to say that again in my edit summary. Edgar Searle (talk) 00:05, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2021 November newsletter

The WikiCup is over for another year and the finalists can relax! Our Champion this year is The Rambling Man (submissions), who amassed over 5000 points in the final round, achieving 8 featured articles and almost 500 reviews. It was a very competitive round; seven of the finalists achieved over 1000 points in the round (enough to win the 2019 contest), and three scored over 3000 (enough to win the 2020 event). Our 2021 finalists and their scores were:

The Rambling Man (submissions) with 5072 points
Lee Vilenski (submissions) with 3276 points
Amakuru (submissions) with 3197 points
Epicgenius (submissions) with 1611 points
Gog the Mild (submissions) with 1571 points
BennyOnTheLoose (submissions) with 1420 points
Hog Farm (submissions) with 1043 points
Bloom6132 (submissions) with 528 points

All those who reached the final round will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. Awards will be handed out in the next few days.

The Rambling Man (submissions) wins the featured article prize, for 8 FAs in round 5.
Lee Vilenski (submissions) wins the featured list prize, for 3 FLs in round 5.
Gog the Mild (submissions) wins the featured topic prize, for 13 articles in a featured topic in round 5.
Epicgenius (submissions) wins the good article prize, for 63 GAs in round 4.
The Rambling Man (submissions) wins the good topic prize, for 86 articles in good topics in round 5.
The Rambling Man (submissions) wins the reviewer prize, for 68 FAC reviews and 213 GAN reviews, both in round 5.
Epicgenius (submissions) wins the DYK prize, for 30 did you know articles in round 3 and 105 overall.
Bloom6132 (submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 71 in the news articles in round 1 and 284 overall.

Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether they made it to the final round or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup, some of whom did very well. Wikipedia has benefitted greatly from the quality creations, expansions and improvements made, and the numerous reviews performed. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition, not forgetting User:Jarry1250, who runs the scoring bot.

If you have views on whether the rules or scoring need adjustment for next year's contest, please comment on the WikiCup talk page. Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2022 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:56, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Award

		The 200 DYK Creation and Expansion Medal
		It seems that you have written 200 Did You Knows and no one has noticed your 200 articles. That can never be the case, thousands of people will have seen your DYKs and thousands will have read your work, seen your photos and know just a bit more about Cascadia and other stuff. You have improved the front page, the DYK project, and to top it all, helped to build an amazing free educational resource. So thanks - people do notice. Victuallers (talk) 11:17, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

interstate 82

hello, SounderBruce! i had a quick question regarding this article and the associated blurb. do you think it is better to state that interstate 82 passes through the tri-cities, or bypasses it?

the article lead and blurb both state that the highway passes through the tri-cities, but the lead later states, in the second paragraph, that it "bypasses the Tri-Cities by traveling southwest around Richland and Kennewick". the article's exit list places exit 113 in kennewick, and google maps appears to agree, though it also appears to show that the highway only technically passes through the tri-cities by running just inside of its border for about a mile.

i can understand if the apparent contradiction was deliberately left in the article due to how the interstate only barely passes through the tri-cities, though wanted to point it out in case the contradiction was not deliberate. alternatively, replacing "Tri-Cities" with "Tri-Cities area" might also be a way to avoid the contradiction. dying (talk) 13:39, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Dying: I've tweaked the hook a bit, but technically a highway could still pass through an area while bypassing it (as it would be bypassing local streets instead of the region itself). I'd rather keep the link at Tri-Cities, Washington, as the metro area article is underdeveloped. Sounder Bruce 21:47, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

understood. i had figured that perhaps one of the instances was actually used metonymically, but could not figure out how. also, i agree with your keeping the link; i wish i had noticed the difference in quality myself. thanks for addressing the issue! dying (talk) 00:25, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Interstate 82 scheduled for TFA

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 12 November 2021. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to comment on the draft blurb at TFA. I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:18, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you today for the article "about a relatively minor Interstate highway that took over 30 years to build because of inter-city disputes on where it should go. This highway passes through one of the most productive agricultural areas in the U.S., especially when it comes to hops and wine". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:43, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

Happy First Edit Day, SounderBruce, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Bobherry Talk Edits 13:39, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:21, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Myrtle Edwards (politician)

On 15 November 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Myrtle Edwards (politician), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Myrtle Edwards's family objected to Seattle's Gas Works Park being named after her? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Myrtle Edwards (politician). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Myrtle Edwards (politician)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Ritchie333 (talk) 00:02, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

I appreciate that you scoured that article I had at DYK -- I'm embarrassed to admit that I hadn't caught that at all, and if it weren't for your sharp eye I would have been responsible for piss-ant sourcing getting to the main page! I owe you one. jp×g 12:29, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Interstate 182

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Interstate 182 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Bneu2013 -- Bneu2013 (talk) 05:20, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Interstate 182

The article Interstate 182 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Interstate 182 for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Bneu2013 -- Bneu2013 (talk) 06:21, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Interstate 182

Hello! Your submission of Interstate 182 at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! lullabying (talk) 22:59, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We Heart Seattle POV tag

I saw that you added a {{POV}} tag on We Heart Seattle, but there are no discussions on Talk:We Heart Seattle disputing the article's neutrality. (There are no discussions on this talk page at all as I write this.) Can you please start one or remove the tag? Thanks! White 720 (talk) 04:24, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[HL-031987-1] Crowley, Walt (October 1, 2000). "Metro Transit begins excavating downtown Seattle transit tunnel on March 6, 1987". HistoryLink. Archived from the original on October 19, 2016. Retrieved April 17, 2011.

[1]