Hello Marcusmax/Archive 9! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.
If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.
Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.
You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey
My name is Victor Grigas, I’m a storyteller at the Wikimedia Foundation in San Francisco working on collecting unique and interesting stories from Wikipedians that can be used to compel donations for the 2011 fundraiser.
If you are interested in participating, and would like to schedule a telephone or Skype interview with me, please send me an email (vgrigas@wikimedia.org) along with any questions you may have.
I would like to change some information that is not accurate and add some accurate information, but it asks me to give a source, but this is from my knowledge. For example, I would like to add in something about Monson. I am extremely vigilant of the scientific Fujita scale, and i know it inside and out and the elements that go into it. I would like to add that the degree of structural damage in Monson suggested damage of EF-4 intensity, although it was officially confirmed an EF-3. I cannot source my knowledge. So my edit is not accepted. How can i fix this, i want to make sure that the information on here is accurate and people know the truth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.106.68.94 (talk) 19:59, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm the one who prodded King Arthur Court, Tennessee some time back. Here's my stated reason: "I live in the local area, and I've never heard of King Arthur Court as an unincorporated community near here. Google didn't find any hits other than Wikipedia and various pages auto-generated based on the GNIS entry. Studying the map, I determined that this is the name of a residential subdivision in the Karns-Powell area. Obscure residential subdivisions do not deserve encyclopedia articles, even if they have GNIS entries."
I don't want to say how many decades I've lived in this area, but suffice it to say that it's long. I stand by my earlier assertions. (And I don't know how this subdivision, which doesn't even appear to be very big, got itself into GNIS.)
Anderson County, Tennessee, and Knox County, Tennessee, have scores of unincorporated places that lack Wikipedia articles that are more significant than King Arthur Court, which doesn't mean they are significant. However, unlike "King Arthur Court" these places (names like Frost Bottom, Byington, Rosedale, Dutch Valley, New River, Medford, Bethel, Kimberlin Heights, and Heiskell) show up occasionally in newspaper obituaries, election precinct names, etc., indicating some inkling of a real existence. "King Arthur Court" does not.
What gave you the idea that King Arthur Court is a notable place that needs an article -- and even deserves to be enshrined in two county templates? --Orlady (talk) 06:00, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Mind you I didn't have full access to what your prod said, all I know is that the place was deleted because it seemed it didn't exist. The only reason I even found out about this place was through Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Avounbaka, where the nominator cited King Arthur Court as a fictitious entity which caused me to look at it in the first place; the USGS is the premier source of GIS and cartographic information worldwide, and to think they would create a false entry had me up in arms to an extent. Last I checked, and bear in mind I have been absent from Wikipedia since fall, there is a precedent that "populated places" are notable for inclusion. If you need help creating articles on other communities in the area, I would be more then obliged to help. -Marcusmax(speak) 13:15, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it is clear from lists like http://tennessee.hometownlocator.com/tn/knox/ (a commercial list which appears to indiscriminantly include all of the "populated places" that GNIS lists in Knox County, Tennessee) that GNIS is now registering every residential subdivision, trailer park, or neighborhood for which someone has recorded a name on a map. IMO, this does not make every residential subdivision or trailer park notable and worthy of becoming the topic of an encyclopedia article. And it totally defeats the value of a county navbox template when the list of "unincorporated communities" in the county is diluted by the addition of residential subdivisions, trailer parks, and other non-notable places. I don't have access to the source where you found that 1994 newspaper article about King Arthur Court, but I bet you could find something in a local newspaper at some time or another concerning every platted subdivision or trailer park in the county -- that doesn't make them worthy subjects for an encyclopedia. --Orlady (talk) 14:51, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the Bearden Quadrangle, there are quite a few places that sound like subdivisions; Oxmoor Hills, Imperial Estates, Spanish Trails all subdivision/trailer park sounding communities. King Arthur Court was registered in the federal database in 1980, but it first appears on topographic maps in 1978. It seems that the Tennessee Valley Authority is responsible for these updates, and these communities being included in the federal registry. I see 3 solutions to permanently resolve this issue, either:
A.) We rework the county navbox to include an "Other" category of sorts, for these pseudo-communities
B.) Find some way to redirect these communities into a parent article (County, township etc.)
C.) Go to AFD, and set a firm precedent on places like this.
This is what I am thinking right now, unless you have a better idea. I recognize the oddity of this situation, but these are still recognized locations both on the federal and local level. -Marcusmax(speak) 15:29, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, those are subdivisions. The Tennessee Valley Authority is a federal agency and it produces topographic mapping in its region. A quick look around the country leads me to think that subdivisions and trailer parks are creeping into GNIS for non-TVA regions, too. For example, see the trailer park listings on http://wisconsin.hometownlocator.com/wi/dane/ . Creating articles for every such "place" and defending them by saying "GNIS made me do it" seems like a colossal waste of effort, although it likely would be appreciated by self-interested real estate developers and trailer park operators everywhere. --Orlady (talk) 20:17, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You raise valuable points, this will cause me to take GNIS data with a grain of salt...do you think it is possible to redirect King Arthur Court to an article for a higher geographic division? -Marcusmax(speak) 20:40, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Orlady, a thousand thanks to you...I had no idea that USGS was adding such trivial places to their databases. I will keep a sharp eye out for similar articles, and work to make sure an "unincorporated place" is not confused with a trailer park. -Marcusmax(speak) 16:03, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Because of the copyright issues I feel it has (and as an recent alumni of this university), I agree it has a lot of stuff that needs to go completely. I can try and help, but not sure what time I have now. The only thing I know for sure is correct is the halls and also the Greek Life. User:Zscout370(Return Fire)04:27, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
So about that picture issue on the Kim Jong-un page, is what I did technically wrong? Did I violate any parameters of wikipedia? Would it be possible to revert back to my change by concurrence of other admins and members? The substance of reader feedback on that page is lack of a picture. --Spartan7W (talk) 10:50, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There is currently a discussion ongoing regarding altering the naming conventions for tornado outbreak and tornado outbreak sequence articles. Please feel free to view and comment on the discussion here. Ks0stm(T•C•G•E) via User:Ks0awb22:35, 9 September 2013 (UTC) You are receiving this notice because you are listed as a member of WikiProject Severe Weather. If you would not like to receive future WikiProject Severe Weather notifications, please add your signature at User:Ks0stm/Notify list.[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/National Weather Service Chicago, Illinois until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. —20300:24, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
