User talk:SounderBruce/Archive 37

Need help creating article
Hi Bruce, I noticed you put that the Notable People section in the Coeur d'Alene, Idaho article needs to have further verification. I think you're totally right, but I dont want to take the time to go through that list and define who should be included in it, and find citations for all of them, etc. Most city articles just dump the list onto a side article so random IPs dont feel tempted to tack on their favorite celebrities. But the thing is, as an unregistered IP, I can't create a page so I have been asking in the edit summaries on the CDA article and on the talk pages of registered editors like Jdubman to create the redlinked List of people from Coeur d'Alene, Idaho sub-article under the section header but havent had any takers yet.

If you could create that Notable People page and dump that list of people in there, that would be a great helping hand. And yes, I know I can register for free but I just dont want to. Thanks for helping us out with the page, Bruce! 2001:5B0:4FC0:68A8:50B4:5A3A:EA1F:ACE5 (talk) 07:25, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Most major city articles dump the list in a side article. This list seems short enough it doesn't warrant a separate article – and being dumped elsewhere doesn't eliminate the need for verification! Reywas92Talk 08:06, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
 * For simplicity sake, I think Im just going to delete the list and make a clear edit summary and put some wiki notes in the main article about when it was deleted in case someone wants to retrieve the info to make that subarticle in the future. I didnt want to take out the list that people made over the years because I know that some find it interesting to look at what celebrity was born/lived/is living/has a house there and because someone would eventually just create it again on the main page, but I dont know what else to do with it. If it had its own article, it would be a stubby article for sure but it would get bigger eventually; the Hillsboro and Grand Forks, ND lists are small too but they have stand alone Notable People articles. I dont think the list can be kept as is, even if it was verified because of the MoS. We would have to make part of the list into prose like the Hillsboro, OR article (one of the few that has anything under a Notable People section) and write about a handful of celebs and then jettison the rest or do the easy thing and delete it entirely. I dont have anything against a Notable People list and I think it would be great if someone made a nice one, I just feel the list doesnt belong on the main page and Im not interested in the celebrities angle enough to do it and I feel its not relevant enough to the article to make it worth the effort anyway. Thanks for the thoughts2001:5B0:4FC0:68A8:747D:919:2430:38F8 (talk) 03:01, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

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

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 08:54, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

DYK for MLS Cup 2020
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2021 WikiCup!
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The competition begins today and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers 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. Any questions on the rules or on anything else 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. We thank Vanamonde93 and Godot13, who have retired as judges, and we thank them for their past dedication. The judges for the WikiCup this year are and. Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:11, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Swedish Medical Center article protection
I looked at the Swedish Medical Center article just last week while doing some improvements to the Providence Everett article and saw that someone is trying to add an unsourced controversies section to the article while undoing any reverts to it from multiple IP addresses. I have already asked the person doing this to explain a need for one on the talk page, yet there isn't an entry from the person on there. I suspect that the only reason there hasn't been a prolonged edit war on there is due to the fact that the edit was, for the most part, left there for close to two months. I feel like a proper controversies section is warranted, but I'm not interested in gathering resources to add it right now, so I would like your opinion on how to address this issue. I know there aren't enough recent revisions to warrant article protection, but I have a feeling that this unnamed user will continue to attempt the controversies addition until an administrator takes action. --SmartAn01 (talk) 07:47, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * , per WP:CRITS, controversy sections should be avoided and instead such instances should be woven into the rest of the article. The IP's addition would be fine with sourcing (and it's easy to find given the amount of coverage dedicated to Swedish from The Times).  Sounder Bruce  16:49, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Happy New Year 2021!


Abishe (talk) — is wishing you a Happy New Year! It's the last day of 2024 and tomorrow will be . Hope the coming year brings pleasures for you. Have a prosperous, enjoyable and a productive . This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, 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 New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

News On Wiki check-in
Hi there! Thank you for your interest in our campaign to improve the public's knowledge about local newspapers. Time has flown since we got going in September, and our six month campaign ends in just a month! We'd like to check in with you about work you have done, or any articles you'd like to write or edit to do before we wrap up.

We published a mid-campaign report, highlighting strong work from several Wikipedia editors (both new wiki folks and veterans); contributions from Kristy Roschke's journalism course at Arizona State University; and strong engagement from groups like AfroCROWD and Wikimedians of the Caribbean.

As we begin our final push, we would love to learn what you have been working on, or help you with any challenges. We're hosting several informal video conference sessions in the next week. (If that format is no good for you, just let us know.) We'd love to hear what newspapers have caught your interest, any articles you've already written, and also any kind of support you could use in writing up newspapers that lack Wikipedia entries. We'll focus especially on newspapers of the Caribbean in our final month, as we continue to work on Black-owned U.S. newspapers, and newspapers of Washington State. Please register for one of these Zoom meetings. If these times don't work for you, or if you hate Zoom, etc., just reply here (please include the text " " so we get notifications), and we'll find another way to connect with you.
 * Saturday Jan. 30, 2pm Pacific / 5 PM Eastern (with Pete)
 * Tuesday Feb. 2, 5pm Pacific / 8pm Eastern (with Pete)
 * Wednesday Feb. 3, 12:30pm Pacific / 3:30 PM Eastern (with Sherry)
 * Thursday Feb. 4, 12:30pm Pacific / 3:30 PM Eastern (with Sherry)

We hope to hear from you soon! -Pete Forsyth (talk) 00:50, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Appropriate article for Everett averted school shooting plot
I drafted a paragraph or two talking about the 2018 plot by an Everett student to shoot up ACES High School. While there is a sentence already covering it in the Mukilteo article, I feel that it is notable enough to be included with further detail in either the Kamiak High School or the Mukilteo School District article also, but I am kind of split on which article is the best fit for it and would like your advice. On the one hand, Kamiak was the initial target of the student; on the other hand, the school district operates both ACES and Kamiak. I have the section up on the Kamiak article, but if you feel that the district article is more appropriate for the section, I am more than willing to move the section to the district article and put a short statement on the Kamiak article noting the original intention of the student.

Also, I noticed that you have a picture of Kamiak included in the Mukilteo article. I would like to know if you are okay with its possible inclusion in the school's infobox. Thanks in advance. SmartAn01 (talk) 02:32, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
 * , it would be best to cover this in the school district article unless a substantial article can be created on the ACES program (which probably isn't likely). It is best not to overwhelm a small article with a single incident. Also, almost all pictures hosted on Wikimedia Commons are free to be used in any appropriate article, so there is no need to ask for permission.  Sounder Bruce  23:47, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Can you look at two draft articles?
Greetings SounderBruce, I am a COI editor working now on two draft articles, one for Daniel Sillman and the other for Relevent Sports Group. I noticed that you have a strong interest in soccer from your user page, and that you have also created a link to the International Champions Cup and a red link to Relevent Sports Group in an edit you made to Bank of America Stadium. Could you take a look at my drafts, and see if they are ready for main space, and if you think they are not yet ready, could you suggest what I can do to get these articles there. Thanks so much. SylviaatRSG (talk) 08:42, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I am just asking again if you could take a look at Relevent Sports Group and Daniel Sillman. I would really appreciate your input. Thank-you.SylviaatRSG (talk) 09:20, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Kent
Could you please stop just removing relevant content without discussion? The article on the city I live in is not owned by you. I strongly disagree with your judgement and opinion - noting that's what "too many links in intro" and doubting reliability of Census estimates is; not to mention the unexplaind removal of mention of Link light rail (which is kind of a huge deal in Kent). I'm more than willing to set-up an account and take this to an admin if needed. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:601:281:29D0:1F2:27D6:D470:C2FF (talk) 04:16, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

You need to conduct yourself with a bit more humility and introspection re: your behavior on this article. You act as though you own it and just delete whatever info. you decide doesn't fit YOUR vision for the article. Never mind that it's sourced, never mind that other users like it, never mind that any reasonable person would find it interesting - the article must certainly meet your personal requirements above all else. As someone who first edited Wikipedia in 2005 and many moons ago was an admin., I find that a reprehensible misconduct of a senior editor like yourself. ImogenCaroline (talk) 04:05, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Seattle Center Monorail
Hello:

The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Seattle Center Monorail has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Best of luck with the article moving forward.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 15:52, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Writing Black History of the Pacific Northwest into Wikipedia - Editathon 2021
Cascadia Wikimedians placed this banner at 03:53, 24 February 2021 (UTC) by using the Meetup/Seattle/Invitees list. To subscribe to or unsubscribe from messages from Meetup/Seattle, please add or remove your name here.

Revert Warning
I hope you understand the hypocrisy in telling me to not revert your edit when you twice reverted mine. Doesn't even make sense. I would encourage you to look at other American public transit systems such as Los Angeles, NYC, or Boston. I would also encourage looking at Chinese and Korean systems. They all follow this precedent. Sorting tables are never used because it is illogical to order the stations in any way other than that which they exist along the line. There is no value to ordering them alphabetically or by opening date. Timelines of extension are included elsewhere in the article.

Second, the color banners on tables are certainly optional but they are widely on wikipedia for transit systems with multiple lines. Again see Chinese and Korean metros as well as the Los Angeles metro rail system. though an argument can be certainly made for the case that since Line 2 has not opened yet there is no need for the banners.

In reality, there is no reason to get worked up over the edits I have made. It makes the table more consistent with the those from articles of other metro rail systems. And understand the hypocrisy of accusing me of starting an edit war when you reverted my edit first. ```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cerviche (talk • contribs) 03:00, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
 * , consensus requires more than examples copied between random articles. As the three Sound Transit articles have gone through some form of peer review (one of which was passed at FA), it is expected to reflect community consensus on basic layout. Your edits to the tables do not improve the articles at all.  Sounder Bruce  03:30, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Washington State Route 539
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Washington State Route 539 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) 09:20, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Washington State Route 539
The article Washington State Route 539 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Washington State Route 539 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) 05:22, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia featured topics Line 1 (Sound Transit) stations good content
Hello, SounderBruce,

If you are going to assign nonexistent categories to articles, it would help if you would create the categories and fit them into the existing category structure on Wikipedia so they don't show up as errors. Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 05:39, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
 * , I apologize for the category error, but please let me know before reverting across the entire set of talk pages. Moving a Featured/good topic is not exactly well-explained anywhere in the documentation, so things get missed. I do not appreciate having to put in extra work with no warning.  Sounder Bruce  05:47, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Triple Crown

 * I applied for the WikiProject Oregon crown, as I already have a normal one. Sorry for the confusion.  Sounder Bruce  00:00, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry for overlooking that. It's so rare that someone applies for a project Triple Crown; as soon as I see a one line nomination I assume it's for the regular Triple Crown. I'm changing yours and updating our records accordingly. :) Damien Linnane (talk) 03:38, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

WikiCup 2021 March newsletter
Round 1 of the competition has finished; it was a high-scoring round with 21 contestants scoring more than 100 points. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2, with 55 contestants qualifying. You will need to finish among the top thirty-two contestants in Round 2 if you are to qualify for Round 3. Our top scorers in Round 1 were:


 * Epicgenius led the field with a featured article, nine good articles and an assortment of other submissions, specialising on buildings and locations in New York, for a total of 945 points.
 * Bloom6132 was close behind with 896 points, largely gained from 71 "In the news" items, mostly recent deaths.
 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 ImaginesTigers, who has been editing Wikipedia for less than a year, was in third place with 711 points, much helped by bringing League of Legends to featured article status, exemplifying how bonus points can boost a contestant's score.
 * 🇷🇼 Amakuru came next with 708 points, Kigali being another featured article that scored maximum bonus points.
 * Flag of the United Nations.svg Ktin, new to the WikiCup, was in fifth place with 523 points, garnered from 15 DYKs and 34 "In the news" items.
 * 🇧🇼 The Rambling Man scored 511 points, many from featured article candidate reviews and from football related DYKs.
 * Standard of Oliver Cromwell (1653–1659).svg Gog the Mild, last year's runner-up, came next with 498 points, from a featured article and numerous featured article candidate reviews.
 * Bennington Flag.svg Hog Farm, at 452, scored for a featured article, four good articles and a number of reviews.
 * 🇺🇸 Le Panini, another newcomer to the WikiCup, scored 438 for a featured article and three good articles.
 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Lee Vilenski, last year's champion, scored 332 points, from a featured article and various other sport-related topics.

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start again from scratch. In Round 1, contestants achieved eight featured articles, three featured lists and one featured picture, as well as around two hundred DYKs and twenty-seven ITNs. They completed 97 good article reviews, nearly double the 52 good articles they claimed. Contestants also claimed for 135 featured article and featured list candidate reviews. There is no longer a requirement to mention your WikiCup participation when undertaking these reviews.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article candidate, a featured process, or something else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews.

If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:27, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Washington State Route 539
Hello! Your submission of Washington State Route 539 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! Grk1011 (talk) 16:56, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of MLS Cup 1999
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article MLS Cup 1999 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) 16:41, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of MLS Cup 1999
The article MLS Cup 1999 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:MLS Cup 1999 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 18:21, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of MLS Cup 1999
The article MLS Cup 1999 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:MLS Cup 1999 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) 12:22, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Request of removing inappropriate pictures on all stations of Central Link
Hi Bruce, there are a lot of disturbing and inappropriate pictures along with all station pages of Central Link of Sound Transit and I wish you can help me remove them. Can you do that? Thx. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JC1199154 (talk • contribs) 03:18, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Where are you seeing these inappropriate pictures?  Sounder Bruce  05:26, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Most of the stations along the route like on the top and I'm seeing a male probably nude and was kneeling down to another person with just their feet. There are two identical pictures in the same section.

Today's featured "glass box"
Congratulations on getting University of Washington station featured at Today's featured article! I have been using the general layout of this article as a model to try an improve the articles for the stations on the Aoimori Railway Line, namely Kominato Station which is being reviewed for promotion to Good Article status. I really enjoy seeing all of your work of the infrastructure of the Puget Sound region, it's some of the best content out there!  ❯❯❯ Mccunicano ☕️  00:39, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the shoutout. I'll be watching your progres in Aoimori with great interest, as my grandmother was from the region and used to ride the older lines back in the 1950s. You should definitely shoot for a Good topic of those stations!  Sounder Bruce  05:25, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I really would like to go make it a good topic, but I'm just not sure there's enough material (even in print) out there for some of the very rural ones plus I'm only going to have access to libraries in Aomori for another few months. That's cool to hear that you have a tie to the region!  ❯❯❯ Mccunicano ☕️  07:21, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:44, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you today for University of Washington station, "about a glass box in front of a football stadium that tens of thousands of people enter in order to descend 100 feet and board a train. In other words, a pretty standard train station, though one that had a long and complex planning process that preceded its construction."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:22, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Why did you remove template for MLS on ESPN in the article for the 2019 MLS Cup?
About two weeks ago, I placed a newly created template for MLS on ESPN in the article for MLS Cup 2019. You immediately removed it without giving a formal explanation, even though sources indicate that the game aired on ESPN's sister network, ABC that year. We know this for sure, because Fox Sports had the rights to the All-Star Game that year, since it currently only has the rights to the MLS Cup in even numbered years. What, we're not supposed to tell readers who broadcasts the MLS' championship game (outside of the article listing the broadcasters in itself) in the respective article? BornonJune8 (talk) 08:19, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , no other piece of recognized sports content on Wikipedia uses navboxes to display broadcasters. As the information can easily be found in two other lists, it is wholly unnecessary and feels in the same vein as the situation described at WP:PERFNAV. MLS Cup broadcasts also don't fall under any of the programming blocks described in the navboxes, so to link them together is misleading and pointless.  Sounder Bruce  09:29, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Washington State Route 539
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 12:01, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Varisha Khan for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Varisha Khan is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Varisha Khan until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Steven McRae (talk) 02:51, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Access date for Newspapers.com citations
Hi Bruce - congrats on the recent TFA. Re Hollywood/Western station, I'm of the opinion that since Newspapers.com clips are images of physical newspapers, which obviously won't change, an access date is not needed. I've opened a discussion here that might interest you. Cheers, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:18, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

DYK for List of international goals scored by Dwayne De Rosario
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

DYK for 1200 Stewart
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 12:02, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

DYK for MLS Cup 1999
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Kingdome GA nomination help
I have expanded and cleaned up the Kingdome article over the past month, and I think it is now at GA quality, or at least close to it. However, since I have university classes starting this week, I am skeptical that I can respond to requests for improvement in a timely manner, at least until the quarter ends in June. With that in mind, I would like to know if you could help with the nomination so that potential suggestions are quickly implemented; I would very much appreciate it. Regardless, I will respect your decision either way. --SmartAn01 (talk) 04:20, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , I'm impressed with your efforts to improve the article, but I don't think it's quite ready for GA. There are several paragraphs without citations for various statements (including one tagged in the College football section), and quite a few citations from the concert table are bare or need replacing. The article also needs more information about its architecture, playing surfaces, and layouts over the years.
 * I would suggest finding more sources with a Wikipedia Library card for Newspapers.com access, as they have the Spokesman-Review.  Sounder Bruce  04:56, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I would suggest finding more sources with a Wikipedia Library card for Newspapers.com access, as they have the Spokesman-Review.  Sounder Bruce  04:56, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

DYK for MLS Cup 2000
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

I-444
Just in case it crossed your mind when you simplified the history, The Oklahoman actually copyvio'd Wikipedia's Interstate 444 article, instead of the other way around. (diff predating the Oklahoman article) So if you were revising to remove a copyvio...well, you needn't have spent the time. :P —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 04:01, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I only realized halfway through, but I do think it should be fine with some more work. Whoops.  Sounder Bruce  04:36, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Heh, I only noticed when I saw your edit and was excited to see a print article on I-444, only to read it and realize it felt eerily familiar...and I thought to myself, "Wait, didn't I write this?" —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 07:04, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

FA
Congratulations to your new FA! Let me know if I can be helpful in a TFA nomination. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:52, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Promotion of Seattle Center Monorail

 * Congratulations! --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 14:44, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of List of Community Transit bus routes for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Community Transit bus routes, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Articles for deletion/List of Community Transit bus routes until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Interstate 405 (Oregon)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Interstate 405 (Oregon) 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 Mccunicano -- Mccunicano (talk) 02:40, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

WikiCup 2021 May newsletter
The second round of the 2021 WikiCup has now finished; it was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 61 points to advance to Round 3. There were some impressive efforts in the round, with the top eight contestants all scoring more than 400 points. A large number of the points came from the 12 featured articles and the 110 good articles achieved in total by contestants, as well as the 216 good article reviews they performed; the GAN backlog drive and the stay-at-home imperative during the COVID-19 pandemic may have been partially responsible for these impressive figures.

Our top scorers in Round 2 were:


 * 🇧🇼 The Rambling Man, with 2963 points from three featured articles, 20 featured article reviews, 37 good articles, 73 good article reviews, as well as 22 DYKs.
 * Epicgenius, with 1718 points from one featured article, 29 good articles, 16 DYKs and plenty of bonus points.
 * Bloom6132, with 990 points from 13 DYKs and 64 "In the news" items, mostly recent deaths.
 * Bennington Flag.svg Hog Farm, with 834 points from two featured articles, five good articles, 14 featured article reviews and 15 good article reviews.
 * Standard of Oliver Cromwell (1653–1659).svg Gog the Mild, with 524 points from two featured articles and four featured article reviews.
 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Lee Vilenski, with 501 points from one featured article, three good articles, six featured article reviews and 25 good article reviews.
 * Transgender Pride flag.svg Sammi Brie, with 485 points from four good articles, eight good article reviews and 27 DYKs, on US radio and television stations.
 * Flag of the United Nations.svg Ktin, with 436 points from four good articles, seven DYKs and 11 "In the news" items.

Please remember that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of Round 2 but before the start of Round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in Round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (except for at the end of each round, when you must claim them before the cut-off date/time). 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 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 WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Judges: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:28, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Interstate 405 (Oregon)
The article Interstate 405 (Oregon) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Interstate 405 (Oregon) 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 Mccunicano -- Mccunicano (talk) 01:21, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Featured Article
Since you brought up the topic of featured articles, I would recommend looking at MTR and AirTrain JFK. Those are in line with the changes I made to the Link articles. The changes do in fact make the article better as it makes the stations table more consistent with the formatting used on other peer reviewed featured articles. In fact, the MTR article is considered one fo the gold standard articles for metro systems on wikipedia. Just because you don't like the change does not mean you can claim it's bad. You have no justification for why the table should be sortable when this is not done on other featured project trains articles. As I said above, it's illogical for the table to be sortable. The use of color is debatable but again, among featured articles in Project Trains there is plenty of precedent for this formatting choice. Articles can always be improved. Just because Line 1 (Sound Transit) is featured does not mean it is immune to changes.

Just so you know something
It was not me who added the Twilight line to Washington I just added a source that I founded, FYI

Happy Birthday!
 Happy Birthday! Have a very happy birthday on your special day!

Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 00:52, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Denny Centre
ONUnicorn (talk) 00:03, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Any advice on improving city articles?
Good morning SounderBruce,

I'm pretty sure I've seen you on the AARoads Forum as well as here, which is quite a coincidence.

I see you had improved Everett, Washington to GA status but were unable to get past the FAC. You also have other articles that you improved to featured article status. I'm currently trying to get Buffalo, New York to at least GA status, as I was able to do so with Utica, New York in the past. It's a headache of having 30 tabs open in Firefox and taking notes in WordPad.

I'm wondering though, is the criteria between GA and FA as stringent as it may seem? Buffaboy talk 06:40, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
 * FAC can rely on luck and good timing as much as adherence to the criteria (which are a big step above what a GA requires). Being lucky enough to have some good reviews early on can kickstart the momentum needed to carry an FAC to the finish line, but I had poor timing with the Everett nom as it was in the middle of a huge surge thanks to COVID. As for the criteria differences, you'll want to keep the "high-quality sources" section in mind even while writing for a GA if you have aspirations to go to FA with the article; it'll be much easier than having to overhaul with new sources during the nomination process. The Buffalo article is on the right path in that regard, but I would try to find replacements for books from small-time publishers and local-farm ones like Arcadia/Images of America.  Sounder Bruce  08:49, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the response and also the edit on the article. You're right about the high quality sourcing aspect. The way I see it, you can certainly write a GA from your computer at home. A FA might require going to the research room at the local library. I don't mind either! Buffaboy  talk 20:21, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
 * edit: by reviews, do you mean like failed FANs?

Deal with the edit warning on article "Ningbo" through Talk
Hi, please be specific about which part of the article "Ningbo" you think needs more citations to make it more reliable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 喂番茄 (talk • contribs) 02:12, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * , It's not the citations but the excessively promotional language used in the Economy and Tourism sections. Removal of an edit notice requires an editor to actually fix the issue, not edit war their way out of WP:BRD.  Sounder Bruce  02:54, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, I think the edit warning put by you User:SounderBruce was not well-grounded. The information in the economic and tourism section along with many other sections of "Ningbo" was previously outdated and many data have not been updated since 2013, so I have been trying to update the article with the latest data. Firstly, I have not got the time to update the economic section yet, so as you can see, the data in that section are still for the year 2013. I did update a paragraph on the economic status of Ningbo in the introduction section (beginning section) of the article, not in the economic section, but the data I used are publicly available on the government website, and the citations are all provided. Secondly, I did update the information in the tourism section by giving a short introduction to each tourism attraction and site. What I did was: 1. grouping the previous tourist sites by subdivisions (locations) of the city, 2. linking those keywords with those already existing articles, 3. giving information about when the tourist sites were built, 4. giving information about what the sites are used for historically and currently. Meanwhile, I did not use any overly-promoting language such as "must-go" to encourage people, just some necessary background information since this is an encyclopedia website. The parts I have updated are all factual information that is verifiable through publically available sources, rather than any commentary or personal opinions. Therefore, please RESPECT other's work, even if some users do not like the information. Wiki is a publically available platform for everyone to get verifiable factual information. When someone is not into the information about a particular city, it does not mean other people are not into it. I think it is very reasonable to ask the you User:SounderBruce: Can you please provide several shreds of evidence by directly quoting the sentences in those parts that you regard as "overly promoting" or fake information? If not, I am afraid the previous edit warning is not well-grounded so that it will be removed--Commented by 喂番茄 (talk)

Infobox flags
I've been watching your edits regarding infobox flags at Seattle. I'm not sure if this has gone to an RfC, but there seems to be a lot of editors who don't feel they improve articles.

I have also been wanting to pursue an RfC about promotional rankings in city articles. A consensus was reached about this by Canadian editors here, but I'm not sure how editors of US city articles feel about them. If you have a moment, please have a look at Talk:Carmel, Indiana. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 10:11, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Interstate 405 (Oregon)
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Removal of American Community Survey data for Portland and Seattle
Wht are you removing the ACS data. We use it as a reliable source on 100s if not 1000s of wikipages? The census data is not scheduled until late September and this year everything has been delayed by two months. The ACS is more accurate than the 2010 census numbers. I can take this up at the reliable sources noticeboard if you like.Patapsco913 (talk) 22:10, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The ACS is not a complete census, so it is inappropriate to give it the same weight as census data. It is best used in prose to back up census numbers, but does not need its own subsection with graphics, as that would be misleading for readers. As there is no deadline, waiting a few months for the complete 2020 census datasets (which will be formatted and updated by bots for consistency across all city articles) does no harm, while using ACS data in the interim would be pointless.  Sounder Bruce  23:37, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I do have it listed as the ACS estimate. I am not giving it the same weight, I am merely augmenting the outdated 2010 census numbers. It is a reliable source (in fact most of what the US government relies on is from the ACS and not the official Census). How do you use it as prose to back up census numbers since they are different years (2010 v. 2019). Why is it pointless if it is more current than the 2010 census? Why is it misleading? The Bots have not worked since 2000 since they cannot recognize all the changes and formats. Most cities are still sitting on 2000 Census numbers. What is the harm of leaving this in until the new numbers come out? I will take this to reliable sources notice board.Patapsco913 (talk) 05:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)