Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of U.S. state name etymologies

List of U.S. state name etymologies
Put together by Miskwito. Informative, well-sourced, &c. &c. --Ptcamn 12:05, 27 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Nice. A couple of comments: the lead section is rather short: would it be possible to add some sort of summary (something like "The names of the U.S. states are derived from a variety of languages.  The origins of some of the names are uncertain, but at least x are derived from Spanish, y from Latin, and z from native American languages.  N states are named after people, m after flowers." (or animals or whatever))  Secondly, are the "Word of origin" column in IPA?  I think some of them need IPA templates to avoid boxes for some browsers - I have added them to the two (Arizona, Hawaii) that were problematic for me, but there many be others for other people. -- ALoan (Talk) 12:21, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Most of them aren't written in the IPA, but in whatever the general transliteration of that language into Latin seems to be. In most cases, anyway. But, for example, the writing systems for O'odham and Hawaiian use 'unusual' characters that might be hard to display. --Miskwito 20:46, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay, I tried writing a lead, more or less directly following your suggested model. Thoughts?
 * Support now - I have tweaked the lead a little, and a few loose ends are mentioned below, but this is good enough for me. -- ALoan (Talk) 17:58, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Support. Well informative, well presented, and well cited. My only recommendation is I would like to see those maps in SVG. Its just a preference of mine so I still support it regardless. See WP:GL if you need help with the conversion.↔NMajdan &bull;talk 17:30, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Refs need formatting. See cite web. Jay32183 19:34, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Just a note that I didn't "put together" the list. I just cited everything, and fixed some of the etymologies that were wrong or incomplete. In any case, I vote weak oppose for right now, because there's still some work that could be done with the page. The maps are out of date, for one thing , and I wasn't aware of the template, so as Jay32183 pointed out, the citations are apparently incorrectly formatted?  I also was planning on double-checking some of the etymologies with some experts . And yeah, the lead could be improved as well . --Miskwito 20:46, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: Actually, from what I can see, the cite web template is not required, is it? To quote from WP:CITET: "The use of Citation templates is not required by WP:CITE and is neither encouraged nor discouraged by any other Wikipedia citation guidelines. They may be used at the discretion of individual editors, subject to agreement with the other editors on the article. Some editors find them helpful, while other editors find them annoying[...]" --Miskwito 17:49, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Formatting is still terribly inconsistent. Note that almost none of them have access dates,for example. Cite web has the advantage of standardizing references easily across articles. Circeus 19:55, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Just a note that I've made a new map (Image:US_State_Name_Etymologies.png), one that's up-to-date (and a bit more specific), to the article --Miskwito 00:13, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Support, now that the map is up-to-date and stuff. Note that I've been a major contributor to the article for the last several weeks. The citation style for the references certainly can be improved, though... --Miskwito 00:13, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose References need to be properly formatted. The "meaning and notes" columns needs check for punctuation (some have ending periods, but most don't), and the topic can and should be bolded in the lead. Unsourced statement under the Arizona notes. Circeus 19:55, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: I converted all the online references I could to cite web, and went through the page's history to find out what dates I first cited each website, and thus added the access dates to all the sites. The etymology for "Arizona" has also been updated/changed. --Miskwito 20:29, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Looks all fine tome now. I especially like the maps. Circeus 21:00, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Informative, well-presented. Looks accurate and well-sourced as well. Dewrad 21:18, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Support per Dewrad. I like how many sources there are; it looks very good. Cliff smith 01:45, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Support I really like this lisa. Very informative. Sotakeit 17:36, 10 March 2007 (UTC)