User talk:RalphMaggio509

Bioregion
Why are you adding "bioregion" to infoboxes? Has there been a consensus to start adding this? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 13:50, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

I'm new to Wikipedia so there has not been a consensus, but the information being added (the bioregion) is both correct and pertinent in my opinion. If you click on the wikipedia page that it links to, you can see that the Cascadian bioregion includes all of the cities that I edited. Many people are not informed about this, so I figured that adding it into the infobox is the most obvious and appropriate form to gain exposure of a reality. RalphMaggio509 (talk) 20:31, 27 October 2018 (UTC)RalphMaggio509


 * If you look at Template:Infobox settlement, you will see the parameters that can be added. There are some blank spots that are often filled with a FIPS code or GNIS link, or some other factual, verifiable bit of information.  You added bioregion, and one of the bioregions you added was Cascadia (bioregion), which the Wikipedia article about it calls a "concept".  This is very different from a ZIP Code or geographic coordinate.  For this reason, it would be best to seek a consensus before adding conceptual things to a bunch of infoboxes.  It's also a good idea to start off slow.  Thanks for your understanding.  Magnolia677 (talk) 22:22, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

October 2018
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Pasco, Washington, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. John from Idegon (talk) 16:25, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Yakima, Washington. John from Idegon (talk) 20:20, 27 October 2018 (UTC) This is being posted on your talk page where you can receive messages from other Wikipedians and discuss issues and respond to questions. At the end of each message you will see a signature left by the editor posting. This is done by signing with four tildes ( ~ ) or by pressing or  in the editing interface toolbox, located just above the editing window (when editing). You won't need to sign your contributions to articles themselves; you only need to when using talk pages. If you have any questions or face any initial hurdles, feel free to contact me on my talk page and I will do what I can to assist or give you guidance.

Again, welcome! John from Idegon (talk) 20:22, 27 October 2018 (UTC) John from Idegon (talk) 20:22, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

What is disruptive about editing incorrect information and adding a table to clean-up the space, as is done on other Wikipedia pages for cities? I also cited my source (the US Census). RalphMaggio509 (talk) 20:27, 27 October 2018 (UTC)RalphMaggio509
 * Of that alone, nothing. It wasn't a good idea, but it wasn't disruptive. However, replacing it without consensus after it had been reverted was disruptive. Articles on similar topics, such as cities, should be composed in roughly the same way. The guidelines for cities can be found at WP:USCITY. The exact same language and layout can be found at the vast majority of US settlement articles. You're not required to follow it, but it's been there in that form for nearly 9 years. Logic dictates that if it we're actually unclear (ie, needing improvement), someone would have "fixed" it by now. Simply put, you removed content that another individual had added and that had stood the test of time simply based on your personal preference. That's pretty much the definition of "not an improvement". John from Idegon (talk) 22:54, 27 October 2018 (UTC)