Talk:Seattle/Archive 8

Interactive maps Declined
Hey everyone, so I recently had Seattle equipped with mapframe (an interactive map), and it was reverted because apparently it's "janky" and it loses it's city boundary. I have no issues running mapframe on my side, and the city boundary is clearly highlighted in the map. There are no bugs to fix, so should I revert the edit? What do you guys think? - SkunkaMunka
 * I’ve tried to get it to work on two different platforms so far and it’s not working at all. I’d like to figure out why. If you’re asking “what do you all think?” shouldn’t you wait for someone to answer before going ahead again? What’s the big rush here? I kind of like this idea but can we figure out what we want and why first? And if the interactive features aren’t working for some users, shouldn’t it fail gracefully to a static image instead of a blank hole in the page? —Dennis Bratland (talk) 04:38, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * - hi - there are no bugs here, I believe the implementation just needs to be adjusted. I can make this a stable mapframe map, as is present in many major U.S. city articles. Take for instance, Chicago, if you want to have it still display plenty of information statically. Please see Why mapframe maps? for explanations into the advantages of these maps, and feel free to discuss further. Per BRD, it is completely fine to add these more advanced maps, though you are also perfectly free to revert and discuss as you are here. ɱ  (talk) 16:48, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * - Hi, so I had an edit conflict due to posting at the exact same time, that was kind of humorous. Anyway, I would be fine with adjusted maps, but I am not happy with the stack bug on mobile Wikipedia. I would like to stick with city limits and the teardrop in the same map until the stack bug is fixed, because it looks horrendous on mobile versions. - SkunkaMunka
 * That's an issue I'll raise at Template talk:Stack, but sure, we can do it that way as well. ɱ  (talk) 17:05, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I checked it twice with Safari and Chrome on iOS and got an empty white box. Now using Chrome on MacOS I see a map of the Gulf of Guinea -- lat 0 long 0 I guess, "Null Island" they call it. Seeing Africa when you're looking for Seattle more embarrassing than an empty white box. I don't really mind rich content that doesn't work all the time on all platforms; all I ask is that it fails gracefully back to more primitive content that has some value, like a static image of a map of Seattle. Especially if it's the one and only lead map. If we had the regular maps in the lead infobox and used this interactive map below that, it wouldn't be such a big deal when it's not working. I haven't heard from anybody else who has a history of editing Seattle yet. Curious what they think. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:46, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * As I said, there are no bugs here, the implementation just needed to be adjusted - the code wasn't inputted properly. Here, to the right, is how it would display normally. Zoom could be adjusted, and we could have an interactive map alongside that shows the city's boundaries without having to zoom in. And, hey, we do have a process to fall back on when a map "isn't working" - reverting, like you did. All it takes is the proper parameters to get it to function the way we'd like. ɱ  (talk) 21:31, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

It’s not “embarrassing” to see the Gulf of Guinea, the servers usually fix this within a few hours. But yeah, it is frustrating. SkunkaMunka (talk) 03:39, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Dennis Bratland - Alright, so you said the tech is janky and now you say you get a white box on all devices? That doesn’t make sense. I noticed you wanted the maps in the same infobox. Wikipedia doesn't usually operate with consistencies, I actually used to do it like that; that caused so many issues. The maps you like are so simplistic, a dot on a topographic map. But with mapframe, you can zoom in and out wherever you like, you can see surrounding cities, Seattle is the perfect city for this, Tacoma, Everett, and other cities near it. The city boundaries are highlighted in gray, and much more usable info. - SkunkaMunka (talk) 13:46, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
 * What is your timeframe here? You seem to expect editors to respond to you within hours. Maybe they're busy on other things. Give it a week or two. Is there some reason why this must be done within days, not weeks? What's the rush? I'm happy to wait to see what other editors think. Why not?And no, I can't zoom in whenever I like. Sometimes it works, sometimes not. Even if I can somehow fiddle with browser settings or esoteric Purge url strings or whatever until it starts to work, why should we expect the average Wikipedia reader to make that effort? They're going to come here, give it one try, see it's broken, and give up. That's a loss. We could have given them *some* useful information with a simple static image, but because we're in such a hurry to roll this redundant re-implementation go Google maps out, we give a lot of users nearly zero information. Don't 98.9% of users know Google Maps exists? It's not like they're really missing out. The idea is reduce the number of clicks it takes to get to that from two or three to maybe 1. *If* it works. If it's not working for that person, they get nothing.If you badger me about this once a day for the next seven days, I'm going to repeat what I said seven more times. That's where I stand, OK? I'm not all knowing and infallible. I'm interested in what other editors have to say and I can wait for them to get around to responding. If other editors like the new maps, fine. But nobody has commented yet. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:20, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

All right. I’m sorry for bothering you. I’m waiting for editors to respond, and no one seems to watch this page. SkunkaMunka (talk) 15:34, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Talk:Seattle has 1,014 watchers. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 22:18, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Mapframe
Hello everyone, so I had no real discussion on my last page, so I’m making a new one. I recently had Seattle equipped with an interactive map, aka mapframe. It got reverted, and I need to discuss with a large community. What do you guys think? SkunkaMunka (talk) 19:51, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * It seems even with a thousand watchers, nobody is that active here., it's been well over a week, with nobody commenting besides you. It seems clear this community consensus on mapping Seattle has to just rely on us three. What other option do we have? ɱ  (talk) 19:56, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
 * If a week is all you're willing to wait, OK then. I don't see what the rush is but apparently this is urgent so someone. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:04, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Would it not be possible to have both maps? The static version has the county boundaries and general boundaries of neighboring cities, which is helpful at a glance. I've been out of town for much of the debate, but it looks like the sample provided would be useful but not an exact replacement.  Sounder Bruce  21:44, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Dennis Bratland, a week is more than adequate for the majority of users. Anyone else care to speak up after repeated, drawn out attempts? SounderBruce, yes, it is possible to have both maps. SkunkaMunka saw some value in making county boundaries inherent in mapframe, but I'm not really seeing too much of a benefit. I can always easily add King County to the interactive map, is there anything more? And I don't see any benefit in showing boundaries of other cities that aren't even named. Mapframe has more of a benefit by even showing the names of surrounding cities (and if you really wanted, you could easily add surrounding cities' boundaries too). ɱ  (talk) 13:11, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, that sounds great. Seattle is a great city for mapframe because of the pacific coast. We sure can add King county, and we need to work harder on getting counties in mapframe. SkunkaMunka (talk) 22:50, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
 * If no one can comment, there is no reason for not implementing because no one seems to care. SkunkaMunka (talk) 00:42, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 December 2021
DELETE the information stating that Seattle is the largest city in the Pacific Northwest region of North America. Vancouver, BC is larger. 2601:601:D080:AEB0:7535:41D6:F0C1:D780 (talk) 17:31, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 * ❌ Vancouver makes it obvious that this is false, with its population that is smaller than Seattle's in the second sentence. Reywas92Talk 17:36, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

By and By
I attended what is surely the best law school in the world and am quite confident in my English language abilities, and I had to look "by and by" up - apparently it means "eventually". In my mind, "by and by" conjures up images of country folk strummin' on the ole banjo, but provides no actual meaning. I know that this newspaper article says, "by and by", but a newspaper article is a secondary source just like any other; it does not actually cite authority for the proposition that this is a proper translation. Perhaps the article could be changed to use somewhat more standard language?

Zweifel (talk) 04:31, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 March 2022
MWiki08 (talk) 07:39, 12 March 2022 (UTC) change the picture
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 08:28, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Malformed footnote references in side-block
I am not expert enough to fix this. In the side block of data about Seattle, the page gives two names for the lcoal residents. Both names are footnoted, but the second footnote, #5, refers to another topic.

Demonym(s)	Seattleite[4] or Seattlite[5]

I suggest that both terms be grouped together to point to the same footnote, #4. Footnote #5 does not have an anchor that I can find. There is a reference in the Twinned Cities section (sister cities), but it is to #307 (or so). Regardless of the precise number, the twinned cities reference does not use #5.

I will try to figure out the Wiki-foo required to make this change, but I do not know how to do it today.

Shri (talk) 00:36, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Climate Foundation
I removed Climate Foundation because it does not appear notable and has no secondary sources to support its inclusion here. There are lots of organizations based in Seattle, not all of them are WP:DUE coverage in the article. Ibadibam (talk) 19:20, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

Where can one treat it ?. BoldLuis (talk) 00:58, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Added wikilink - List of people from Seattle
For now, I placed wikilink List of people from Seattle at "See also" section. Some articles have a "Notable people" section instead of the wikilink. In the future, anyone is welcome to move the List wikilink to another spot in the article if need be. JoeNMLC (talk) 12:07, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Seattle is not seaport town it's on a sound not a sea or ocean
Change seaport town to port town 71.126.175.186 (talk) 23:16, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
 * The word seaport in the lead is actually linked, just as I have again done there, to Port. That article quite adequately addresses your concerns. HiLo48 (talk) 02:52, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
 * It is a seaport. seaport means salt water port. The port of Seattle website calls it a seaport many times. Also it is on a sea, the Salish sea, which the puget found is a part of 97.126.85.208 (talk) 19:55, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

2021: First Population Decline in 50 years
Update History and Demographics sections to outline in 2021 Seattle, and King County, experienced their first population decline in 50 years.

Source: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/data/while-seattles-population-declined-another-king-county-city-saw-fastest-growth-in-wa/ NateJ.Wiki (talk) 21:22, 29 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Are you autoconfirmed yet? Could you add this to the article? Dennis Dartman (talk) 10:42, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Looks like I am now (autoconfirmed). I will add the update. NateJ.Wiki (talk) 15:14, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

(IG11/21/23) According to the Washington State Office of Financial Management, which provides more accurate numbers than the census for intermediate years for cities and counties within Washington State, Seattle's population did not decline in 2021. Their findings are: 737,015 in 2020, 742,400 in 2021, 762,500 in 2022, and 779,200 in 2023. This adds important context, as non-census year population estimates published by the Census Bureau are less accurate than State findings and rely on fewer data points as the Census Bureau does not survey annually. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.190.24.4 (talk) 19:30, 21 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Sources:
 * https://ofm.wa.gov/washington-data-research/population-demographics/population-estimates/april-1-official-population-estimates
 * https://ofm.wa.gov/sites/default/files/public/dataresearch/pop/april1/ofm_april1_population_final.pdf 216.190.24.4 (talk) 19:34, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Writing 1 MW
— Assignment last updated by ProfHobbit (talk) 04:14, 19 December 2023 (UTC)