User talk:SounderBruce/Archive 33

TFL notification
Hi, SounderBruce. I'm just posting to let you know that List of MLS Cup finals – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for November 11. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008  ( Talk ) 21:16, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

2019 US Banknote Contest
Sent by ZLEA at 23:30, 19 October 2019 (UTC) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk)

Alexander the Great Edition Triple Laurel Crown
Congrats on the Alexander the Great Triple Crown! You might be interested in a userbox I made, :  — Bilorv ( talk ) 15:09, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

DYK for EvergreenHealth
Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

2+U Naming
Hi SounderBruce,

I'm reaching out again to connect with you regarding the 2+U wikipage. The page still has incorrect information posted and I'd like to work with you to correct the errors. Please let me know if there is a better way to reach you.

Thank you,

Seahawiki (talk) 16:14, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Talk:Mill Creek, Washington/GA1
Thought I'd link you directly, to let you know. Some problems, nothing too major, and, honestly, I may be too nitpicky. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.2% of all FPs 10:05, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mill Creek, Washington
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mill Creek, Washington 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 Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 10:20, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mill Creek, Washington
The article Mill Creek, Washington you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Mill Creek, Washington for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:01, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Nice work, by the way! Sorry if I got nitpicky, but I wanted to do it properly, and I don't do many GARs. I hope it helped! Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.2% of all FPs 08:12, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 29
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Monroe, Washington, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Subdivision ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Monroe%2C_Washington check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Monroe%2C_Washington?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:35, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

MLS Higher Seed
If you look at the sentence I edited, there was NO mention of the MLS Cup final, so even though you said you reverted by edit, you really didn't because you kept the part about the MLS Cup final participant with the more points getting to host the final. Also, there IS A DISTINCTION because it is possible for the number 3 seed in one conference to have more points than the number 2 seed in the other, and it would be the number 3 seed hosting the MLS Final, so there is a distinction. I was just trying to do my best, and in my opinion, your edit is a step down from mine. Don't worry, I won't revert your edit as I can see a relentless edit war on your part.Juve2000 (talk) 03:14, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:CIVIL and WP:AGF.  Sounder Bruce  04:24, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

WikiCup 2019 November newsletter
The WikiCup is over for another year! Our Champion this year is, who over the course of the competition has amassed 91 featured pictures, including 32 in the final round. Our finalists this year were:


 * 1) with 964 points
 * 2) with 899 points
 * 3) with 817 points
 * 4) with 691 points
 * 5) with 388 points
 * 6) with 146 points
 * 7) with 145 points
 * 8) with 74 points

All those who reached the final will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, these prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round, or in the event of a tie, to the overall leader in this field. Awards will be handed out in the coming weeks. Please be patient!


 * wins the featured article prize, for a total of 7 FAs during the course of the competition.
 * wins the good article prize, for 14 GAs in round 5.
 * wins the featured list prize, for 4 FLs overall.
 * wins the featured picture prize, for 91 FPs overall.
 * wins the topic prize, for 7 articles in good topics in round 2.
 * wins the DYK prize, for 14 did you know articles in round 5.
 * wins the ITN prize, for 7 in the news articles in round 1.
 * wins the reviewer prize, for 56 good article reviews in round 1.

Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have achieved much this year. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition, not forgetting User:Jarry1250, who runs the scoring bot.

We have opened a scoring discussion on whether the rules and scoring need adjustment. Please have your say. 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 2020 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 WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66, Vanamonde and Cwmhiraeth 14:18, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Mill Creek, Washington
Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

DYK for James Brown (cyclist)
Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

WikiCup Award
Congratulations! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:58, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

DYK for MLS Cup 2019
Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Washington
Washington (state) what do you think the correct formatting is ? PanamanianBlanco (talk) 04:44, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!
 Happy First Edit Day! Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 07:26, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Your reversion of my edit to "Mill Creek, Washington"
Greetings and felicitations. I noticed that you reverted my edit to Mill Creek, Washington for the reason "Retaining current spacing style and carrying over "ZIP code" from other articles". Unfortunately, my edit contained more than just those changes.


 * I moved the template per MOS:SECTIONORDER.
 * I changed the hyphens in the time zone fields to minus signs per Manual of Style.
 * I changed "ZIP code" to "ZIP Code" per its own article (note the redirect), that article's references, and the usage on the USPS's own site and that site's trademarks pages: 1 and 2.
 * I changed the superscript-2 character to an HTML superscripted 2 per MOS:SUPERSCRIPT.

In light of these points, would you please be so kind as to allow me to re-implement those edits to the article?

Your other two changes—the reversion of my spacing and the rephrasing of the demographic paragraphs—I find, respectively, regrettable and of no concern, and will not dispute them. I will, however, note for your future information regarding the latter that the censuses use that phrasing as standard, so you'll want to keep an eye out for it in all articles covering US settlements. —DocWatson42 (talk) 08:32, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
 * My concern is the consistency with other articles on U.S. places, which use "ZIP Code" in their infoboxes. The demographics section is also meant to be consistent (as they were bot generated long ago), and there were stylistic issues with the prose you added. The spacing after headings is also something that I disagreed with because it's easier for reading when using the regular wikieditor. The other changes were fine (and I did retain quite a few of your other edits), but those I take issue with.  Sounder Bruce  07:54, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

DYK nomination of 2020 MLS All-Star Game
Hello! Your submission of 2020 MLS All-Star Game 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) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! MWright96 (talk) 09:06, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

I saw your message I didn't edit anything. This is a public computer, possibly you sent the message to the wrong person.

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!
Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Flags in Infoboxes
Hello! Thank you for leaving a message on my talk page regarding flags in inboxes. However, I do have a question. WP:INFOBOXFLAG doesn't say that flags can never be placed in infoboxes, it states this "Human geographic articles – for example settlements and administrative subdivisions – may have flags of the country and first-level administrative subdivision in infoboxes." Wouldn't this allow for the state, country, and county flags to be allowed in articles like Seattle? - Iamreallygoodatcheckers (talk) 00:12, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
 * That "may" is important. It's been longstanding consensus that U.S. cities should not use flags in infoboxes, especially those at the county level (often not free use, like King County's). You'll have to comb through the talk page archives on MOS:ICON to see the exact discussions.  Sounder Bruce  00:19, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback and leaving a message in my page. :) I will take this on moving forward. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Billhazy (talk • contribs) 20:34, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Your revision of "Puget Lowland Forest Ecoregion"
Hello, I saw you declined my posting of Puget Lowland Forest Ecoregion, for being similar to Puget Sound Region and Western Washington. However, this is not accurate. Puget Sound Region only consists of areas that are south of Admiralty Inlet, Washington. It does not discuss areas of British Columbia, northwest Washington(such as Bellingham) the San Juan Islands, the northern region of the Olympic Peninsula,or areas south of Tacoma, which the Puget Lowland Forest ecoregion does. This page also does not have detailed data on Flora and Fauna or Climate, which mine does.

There are also major differences between the Western Washington page and mine. The western washington page is heavily focused on the human settlements of the region. My Puget Lowland Forest Ecoregion page is heavily focused on the ecology of the region, as the Puget Lowland is a definable ecoregion in the US, and does not only include western washington or puget sound. For example, my page discusses the flora, fauna, and geology of the region, which the western washington page does not, and the puget sound page does not necessarily apply here because like i've said, this topic encompasses more than just the puget sound region within Washington.

I do not believe my topic should be merged because of these regions. The lowlands are a definable region, and are not the same as Puget Sound or Western Washington as a whole.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackberry996 (talk • contribs) 22:37, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

U.S. Route 2 in Washington
I'm not so sure about this revert - while I understand the problem with needless accessdate changes, updating a 2011 source to a 2015 source is an improvement in my opinion. --Rschen7754 05:04, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I'll have to go back and comb through what to keep, but the mass-change of access dates is what really bothers me, along with the sockpuppetry. Some of the new links include new information that contradicts what's in the article, so that will also need to be updated.  Sounder Bruce  05:11, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Revert of Revision to Washington SR 509
Hi SounderBruce,

I appreciate the feedback regarding my attempts to add the future SR 509 spur route information to this page (you made me get an account so thanks for that). I updated the information on this page with verifiable and current sources from WSDOT. These are not "predicting the future" just stating the current plans of the state and being clear these plans may change and that the article can be updated if/when they do. This is something I've seen across many wiki articles. What I put down is very consistent with other highway pages with proposed routes, and I actually provided more source materials than some of those pages. Please be specific in letting me know what exactly is wrong with the information I provided, especially since it's public information that can all be found in the citations I provided.

Thanks,

TravisEcho (talk) 07:01, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , the information you have attempted to add is out of date and not entirely correct by WSDOT's own admission. The designation of SR 509 is not confirmed to be that of a spur route, and the interchanges are not set at those exact mileposts. I recommend using more secondary sources and reading up on the Manual of Style, which governs how all articles are to be written. As SR 509 is a good article that has been peer reviewed, there is a minimum quality standard that is enforced that is beyond that of other highway articles.  Sounder Bruce  07:06, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Well I would tend to disagree, especially with Phase 1 of the project breaking ground early next year and it remains fully funded unlike other projects as of late... however that is a fair point about MP values, until the highway log is updated you won't know the exact values, but they could be left blank like []. I will read up on what you provided but at this point I think it's clear the page is untouchable and I really don't feel like arguing over it. Here's some other pages with future information you may also want to scrub; [], [], [], []... as you say, don't want to be predicting the future. TravisEcho (talk) 07:51, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Feel free to delete this discussion to clean up your talk page, I've decided to delete my account and leave the editing to the experts... and I don't mean that as an insult, looking at your contribution lists, it's very clear you know what you're doing. Sorry for the hassle and if it's all the same, I'd rather just bow out. Best regards, TravisEcho (talk) 08:54, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! (2601:601:9980:5D80:DCC1:B8B3:C4F9:10DA (talk) 00:49, 10 December 2019 (UTC))

A barnstar for you!
Seconded. Congrats on another TFA, South Lake Union Streetcar! epicgenius (talk) 01:51, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 * +1 +1 --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 01:52, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 * +1 thank you today for South Lake Union Streetcar, the "streetcar with a crude nickname and largely detracted for being a slow-moving speculation machine, but now serves as a critical connection to the headquarters of Amazon and many tech offices in Seattle"! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:56, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2019 U.S. Open Cup Final
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2019 U.S. Open Cup Final 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 MrLinkinPark333 -- MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 05:01, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2019 U.S. Open Cup Final
The article 2019 U.S. Open Cup Final 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:2019 U.S. Open Cup Final for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MrLinkinPark333 -- MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:41, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

South Lake Union Streetcar
I don't believe most readers would be aware of the Waterfront Streetcar (I wasn't), and it seems relevant enough to warrant a direct mention and link in the lede considering the historical context. I initially added the link after thinking Wikipedia didn't even have an article on it, given that it's only referred to obliquely and not linked. Is there a possibility for a link to be included in some form? wctaiwan (talk) 04:54, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't think it would be necessary to link the Waterfront Streetcar, a completely separate service, in the lead when there already is a suitable explanation further down. The article was already scrutinized plenty at FAC and was found to be fine without adding that link, since it would be awkward no matter how it's put in.  Sounder Bruce  06:25, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Please join us for our Cascadia Wikimedians annual meeting, Monday, December 23, 5:30pm PST
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:20, 18 December 2019 (UTC) To unsubscribe from future messages from Meetup/Seattle, please remove your name from this list.

Discussion of Deletion - Don Anderson (Mayor)
Hello,

I saw your comments on the Don Anderson (Mayor) page. It seems as there is a bit of a bias on getting the page deleted since the national and international attention he received after the train derailment upset individuals and groups in the Seattle area that had an interested in trains & other forms of public transportation.

To say he only had a soundbite after the incident occurred is completely inaccurate. He was interviewed by MSNBC (https://www.msnbc.com/andrea-mitchell-reports/watch/amtrak-derailment-lakewood-mayor-don-anderson-was-concerned-about-train-line-1119196227558) and CBS (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/amtrak-derailment-washington-critics-warned-high-speed-route-dangerous/).

International news coverage included the Daily Mail https://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1594136/Lakewood-mayor-warned-safety-concerns-prior-Amtrak-crash.html among many others.

Ama282 (talk) 17:31, 18 December 2019 (UTC)ama282
 * Please read the arguments brought up in the deletion nomination. A few national interviews about a single interview do not qualify him as being notable enough for an entry. Also, the Daily Mail is banned as a source across Wikipedia because of their content, which is wholly unreliable.  Sounder Bruce  19:30, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

I did read them and I was just responding to your particular comment that all he was know for was a soundbite as that is not true. Also, your bias regarding the train accident is very clear and shows strongly. That shouldn’t be part of the decision making. Regardless of the outcome, bias should be left out of it. Ama282 (talk) 20:45, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Re: Your reversion of my edit to "Mill Creek, Washington"
(Archive link)

My concern is the consistency with other articles on U.S. places, which use "ZIP Code" in their infoboxes.
 * —SounderBruce

I think you meant "ZIP code" or "Zip code" (if not, then you are making my case for me. ;-) ) However, I believe that Be bold and WP:FIXTHEPROBLEM ("Correcting inaccuracies...") apply here.  Template:Infobox settlement itself uses "enter ZIP Code, Postcode, Post code, Postal code..." in its documentation's comments, something that has been true since that documentation's inception, and which was not something that I added.  (The Chicago Manual of Style, 17th ed., does use "zip code" in section 10.29, but I believe it to be in error in this case.)  Therefore, I conclude that all US settlement articles should be held to this standard, and that instances of "ZIP code" and "Zip code" should be changed to "ZIP Code". —DocWatson42 (talk) 06:48, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree that we need to us "ZIP Code" if it in fact is the standard preferred across other style manuals, though I see "ZIP code" far more often in print and popular media. It would need to be done with a bot or AWB script, however, to keep things consistent between city articles.  Sounder Bruce  05:51, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I think the common usage is attributable to a drift in the spelling (in this case, capitalization) due to the users not knowing the origin of the term. I would like to create a bot for this correction (along with one for time zone fields, to correct hyphens to minus signs), but I have never investigated doing so until now (Bots).  As for style guides, APA and MLA do not mention ZIP Codes, while Chicago's 17th edition mentions "zip codes" in  section 10.29, for which I have submitted a correction using the same references, minus Wikipedia.  A Google Web search for [ ] turned up this discussion:




 * —DocWatson42 (talk) 06:21, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

DYK review
Hi, noticed you need a QPQ. Can you review Template:Did you know nominations/Kapiʻolani in time for an anniversary promotion on December 31. Thanks. KAVEBEAR (talk) 18:42, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

happy holidays!


MrLinkinPark333 (talk) is wishing you Happy Holidays! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user Happy Holidays, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Happy holidays}} to their talk page with a friendly message. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:49, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!(2601:601:9980:5D80:DCC1:B8B3:C4F9:10DA (talk) 01:37, 27 December 2019 (UTC))

Belated holiday greetings


Belated holiday greetings. Merry Christmas and happy new year.

↠Pine  ( ✉ )  05:54, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Lynn Family Stadium
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 00:01, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2020 WikiCup!
Happy New Year, Happy New Decade and Happy New WikiCup! The competition begins today and all article creators, expanders and improvers are welcome to take part. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. We are relaxing the rule that only content on which you have completed significant work during 2020 will count; now to be eligible for points in the competition, you must have completed significant work on the content at some time! Any questions on the rules or on anything else connected to the Cup should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. Good luck! The judges for the WikiCup are, , and Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:43, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

DYK for 2020 MLS All-Star Game
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 00:01, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Icicle Station, Icicle Creek
FYI there's probably a connection between Icicle Station and Icicle Creek. Just mentioning this because the latter isn't found in the article (yet). ☆ Bri (talk) 22:28, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Leavenworth (the town) was originally named "Icicle" in reference to the creek but it was changed after the railroad started developing the townsite. I'll be including all of this in the Leavenworth article when I get around to rewriting it.  Sounder Bruce  22:39, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Re: Your reversions of my edits to "Bellevue, Kennewick, Kirkland, Spokane, Spokane Valley, Walla Walla, Yakima, Washington"
Cities that have an infobox and indicate a Council-Manager form of government and then note the Mayor and Deputy Mayor seem ignorant of the difference between Council-Manager and Council-Mayor. Washington's a bit unique in that it has a lot more Council-Mayor cities than say California or Texas. I'm putting effort into getting the correct form of government city by city and you're reverting it wholesale because you claim the elected officials are not notable. Some are and some are not. Where a mayor is the chair of the council but other than that no different than the other six, the mayor is not notable. Where the mayor is a strong mayor, in the Council-Mayor form of government the mayor is much more significant. But if that's true then City Manager is significant for the Council-Manager form of government. If you're intent on just reverting my work and Wikipedia doesn't care about this stuff then I'll abandon my effort to work on Washington cities. I've contributed to many cities in California and Texas. Take a look at Anaheim, California that someone has added a need show/hide toggle to the council members, whereas Riverside, California, Sacramento, California, Burbank, California, Visalia, California, Beverly Hills, California, Camarillo, California, Culver City, California, Richmond, California, Long Beach, California and scores of others list council members. Bakersfield, California has a separate page for Bakersfield City Council (?!). And have flag icons, which you've also been systematically reverting. In Texas, take a look at Abilene, Texas, Waco, Texas, Tyler, Texas, Corpus Christi, Texas, Denton, Texas, Keller, Texas, Fort Worth, Texas, McKinney, Texas, Amarillo, Texas, Midland, Texas, Addison, Texas, Round Rock, Texas, College Station, Texas - scores of cities with the Council-City Manager form of government, council members listed and maintained. Click on any city you can think of (and granted, Texas has more state pride in their flag so their flag icon matters, whereas in Washington the Seahawks flag seems to dominate). Still, elected officials are a whole lot more relevant to the governance of a city than the lists of celebrity-wannabe notable people. We're a representative democracy, and city elected representatives are more important in some respects to that city than state or national elected representatives. I can understand the non-notability of really small cities, but let's at least get the forms of government right. Also, in terms of building up the encyclopedic references in the government sections, State House and Senate and US House and Senate representatives are a lot harder to check because of the gerrymandering of districts, each city requires checking the maps to see which district they're in. Once that is figured out updating encumbants is a whole lot easier and most have their own Wikipedia page (whether they are all that notable is not my concern but someone seems to care and create so linking is simple and notability is apparently established]] I'm not a good enough editor to know how to get into an undo contest and I won't bother.  I'd appreciate if you'd undo the reversions and edit the names you don't think are notable.  The forms of government matter.  Mayors aren't significant for a Council-Manager city but City Managers are.  This is an area I have decades of experience in and I can put in a little time here or there but not if it's just reverted throwing out the good with the bad.  Your call.  1958publius (talk) 05:59, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia has policies that cover everything here: Wikipedia is not a directory – a list of city councilmembers with no other merits (like full-fledged biographies, which are only possible for larger cities with more coverage) is less useful than a link to the city's website. The notability guidelines for politicians and common deletion outcomes also show that city councilmembers are not inheritly notable even for some large cities, let alone smaller ones. This largely applies to separate articles, but is also relevant in listing them on the city articles. Much like how we do not list every individual business in a city article, we mustn't list every city councilmember.
 * I suggest you look at city articles that have passed through our peer review process (Good articles and Featured articles), including a few of my own that I have written: Arlington, Washington, Marysville, Washington, Edmonds, Washington, Mill Creek, Washington. All of them don't need to list out the individual city councilmembers; the last example is a council–manager city and has the manager listed with a reliable source backing it, which is the ideal scenario for all of the examples I "reverted" (which entailed cleaning up the infoboxes as well).
 * On the subject of infoboxes, they are not supposed to be filled with rich detail, but rather provide a short summary while reflecting the content present in the body of the article. A list of city councilmembers for a larger city like Tacoma would be perfectly fine if it was a small section of the "Government and politics" section of the body, rather than taking up valuable real estate in the infobox. Readers get bored quickly when they have to scroll to read the introduction.
 * And finally, please read the essay Other stuff exists, which outlines your use of examples to justify city councilmember listings and the use of flags (which still violate MOS:FLAG, which supersedes anything else in the project). Wikipedia is not able to be fully consistent because of the nature of dispersed editing, so some articles may lag behind in reaching acceptable standards, like those examples you linked.  Sounder Bruce  06:18, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Charlotte MLS team
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Columbia Station (Washington)
Gatoclass (talk) 11:44, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Flag of Spokane, Washington
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Flag of Spokane, Washington 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 Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 01:02, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

GA and DYK nominations at the same time
Hi. I commented on your DYK nomination re Flag of Spokane, Washington, and I noticed that you also have a GA review going on at the same time. In addition, I see you have written an extraordinary number of FAs, GAs and DYK hooks. Nice work!

It's been a long time since I submitted an article for review, so I was wondering if you might answer a question for me, the question being: isn't there a risk when having your article nominated for 2 different things that you will need to make changes to satisfy DYK and then GA will say "no, sorry, the article isn't stable"? Essentially, I'm wondering if I should submit "my" new article Charles Montier for GA review, but fear that doing that concurrent with a DYK nom will just cause problems.

Oh, actually, one more: how did you manage to get your initial assessment to B class done so quickly? (I'm guessing active WikiProject)

If you choose to reply, please ping when you do. Thanks either way! --kingboyk (talk) 11:20, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Glad to see you're still hanging around. As for having concurrent nominations, I haven't run into any issues with my formula (incubation in userspace/draftspace and then deploying it for immediate DYK and GAN). The stability criteria for GA has a small footnote that exempts "good faith improvements to the page", which covers most massive expansions. I rarely have to make changes to satisfy the DYK criteria (which is more lenient) beyond adjusting citations or phrasing in some spots. I'd encourage you to nominate your article for GAN as soon as you feel it's ready, even if a bit early, as the current backlog means it may take a few weeks or months for it to be reviewed. I usually self-assess up to C-Class in appropriate cases and let a watcher determine whether to bump it up, but I usually work in semi-active projects.  Sounder Bruce  19:01, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks Bruce, that's very interesting information which has certainly given me some food for thought.
 * Thinking aloud... I have a slight concern that a GA reviewer will "complain" that I have nothing in the article covering Montier's life after his last entry into a notable race in 1934 until his death in 1952, and I can't rectify that as I have no sources for the period (because he retired into 'normal life'). Maybe I should ask the Motorsport WikiProject to conduct a review, and then bash it in for GA immediately if they review it higher than C class.
 * Anyway: I've taken up enough of your time. Thanks again for your help. --kingboyk (talk) 00:53, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Andrew J. Lewis (politician)
— Wug·a·po·des​ 00:02, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Flag of Spokane, Washington
The article Flag of Spokane, Washington you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Flag of Spokane, Washington for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 14:21, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Congrats! --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:16, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 2
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bingen, Washington, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mount Adams ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Bingen%2C_Washington check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Bingen%2C_Washington?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:19, 2 February 2020 (UTC)