Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of incorporated places in New York's Capital District/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was not promoted by Dabomb87 21:49, 8 June 2009 [1].

---

List of incorporated places in New York's Capital District

Nominator(s): Camelbinky (talk) 22:10, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

• Featured list candidates/List of incorporated places in New York's Capital District/archive1

I am nominating this for featured list because it is complete as far as having every city, town, and village in its subject, all columns are filled out (with the exception of some missing photos, though I hope that is expected and not held against the article) I believe the lead is concise, well-written, and informative. Any and all issues brought up can be addressed quickly I hope! Camelbinky (talk) 22:10, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Oppose from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)

• "Below is a list of incorporated cities, towns, and villages in the Capital District of the US state of New York." We don't start lists with "This is a list of..."; see recently promoted lists for examples of more engaging starts. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:30, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

I re-wrote the lead, how is it now?Camelbinky (talk) 01:28, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Much better. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:06, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

• "US State"-->US state
• "Indian Reservations" Link?
• "There are 11 counties in the Capital District with 13 cities, 143 towns, and 62 villages."-->There are 11 counties in the Capital District, comprising 13 cities, 143 towns, and 62 villages.
• "coterminous " Consider a wiktionary link.
• km² needs to be converted to "km²" for WP:MOSNUM and for accessibility reasons.
• "This list is complete, do not add or remove any municipalities from this list unless that place has legally changed its incorporation." Consider making this a hidden note so that only editors see it.
• Per WP:COLORS, you need symbols to accompany the color-coded cells, such as * ^ #
• A key is needed for the abbreviated forms of the MSAs.
• Check the toolbox to your right, there are several dab links to be fixed. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:06, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Fixed dab linksCamelbinky (talk) 21:26, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Comment - ref 3 is not formatted correctly—Chris! _ct 00:33, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I have tried to fix the comments above, but a few I dont understand and need clarification:

• Fixed US State->US state;
• not sure about comment "Indian Reservations Link" but simply removed comment from article that the area doesnt have Indian Reservations, hope that solves that problem, please expand comment if I didnt understand the meaning correctly;
  • I was asking if there was a link to an article about Indian Reservations. Sorry for being unclear. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:28, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
• changed with to combrised of;
• dont know how to do a wiktionary link, but looking into it
  • [[:wikt:word|word]]. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:28, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
• in process of changing the km²'s

Camelbinky (talk) 04:00, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Review by Truco (talk · contribs)

Lead

• 'There are three types of incorporated municipalities in the Capital District of the US state of New York: city, town, and village.' -- Although it is a redirect, I suggest not using the redirect 'US state' and instead use U.S. state.
• 'In the state of New York all the land in a county is in a city, town, or Indian Reservation;[1] while villages are within towns and may cross town or county lines.' -- 1)Comma after 'New York' 2)Remove 'the' from 'the land' is not needed 3)The semi-colon should be a comma.
• 'Ten of the eleven counties of the Capital District make up two Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA) and three Micropolitan Statistical Areas (µSA), which those five statistical areas then make up the Albany-Schenectady-Amsterdam Combined Statistical Area.' -- I think it would be better formatted as Ten of the eleven counties of the Capital District make up two Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA) and three Micropolitan Statistical Areas (µSA); these five statistical areas then make up the Albany-Schenectady-Amsterdam Combined Statistical Area.
• 'Albany, Rensselaer, Saratoga, Schenectady, and Schoharie counties make up the Albany-Schenectady-Troy MSA; while Warren and Washington counties are the consituent counties of the Glens Falls MSA.' -- 1)Either remove the 'while' or replace the semi colon with a comma 2)Typo on 'constituent'
• What verifies the last part of paragraph 1?
• What verifies paragraph two?

List

• My comments are about the same as Dabomb's, per WP:COLOR use a symbol and color code.
• I don't know but I don't like how you use a yellow based color for a symbol and you color the backgrounds of the columns a yellow based color as well. For one, I don't see the necessity of coloring the backgrounds but if you need too, please choose a different color.

References

• Ref 3 should be formatted properly either with a cite template or properly as seen with WP:REF.
• What verifies the entire list itself?--Truco 503 15:37, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Response- the yellow color is based on the FEATURED LIST article List of cities and towns in Tennessee. Which it was ok for that article to pass, so I figured it would be a good basis for this article. Also the gold column heading has become the unofficial Capital District (NY) wikiproject color, other NYCD articles with tables use the color as well. I see no reason to change. I'm confused about the comments- "what verifies the entire list?", the columns for population and area have references, what else in the list do you feel needs to be referenced? Only things that are likely to be challenged need a reference, are you TRULY thinking someone is going to call "bullshit" on the year a municipality was established? What parts of paragraph 1 and 2 are dubious and therefore need a reference? I'm not stacking the list and article with unneeded references to satisfy the needs of an editor who feels that every single sentence or fact in an article needs a reference, if that is what you are aiming for me to do, I'd rather fail. Everything else mentioned will be addressed when I have time.Camelbinky (talk) 19:54, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Okay, for one chill out. We're here to help not create a fight. Second of all, my bad I didn't see the refs in the columns. But actually yes, the years need a ref to verify them, your judgment is not reliable. Third, Ballston Spa, Broadalbin, Cambridge, Chatham, Fort Plain, Greenwich, Nassau, and Valley Falls are villages that cross into two towns. The village of Dolgeville is partly in Fulton County, but is mostly in Herkimer County, which is generally not considered part of the Capital District. (Hm..really? Says who?) Ten of the eleven counties of the Capital District make up two Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA) and three Micropolitan Statistical Areas (µSA), which those five statistical areas then make up the Albany-Schenectady-Amsterdam Combined Statistical Area. Albany, Rensselaer, Saratoga, Schenectady, and Schoharie counties make up the Albany-Schenectady-Troy MSA; while Warren and Washington counties are the consituent counties of the Glens Falls MSA. Fulton County is the sole county in the Gloversville µSA, Montgomery County is the Amsterdam µSA, and Columbia County is the Hudson µSA. Greene County is not in any CSA, MSA, or µSA. (Hm...really? Says who?) I wouldn't point this out if there were a general reference, but since there isn't one, then it needs verification. Fourth, no one is saying you can't have color, what we're saying is that you need to use a symbol as well for the color code. Now for the column headers, okay thats fine.--Truco ₅₀₃ 20:06, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

1. Please calm down, Truco is only trying to help.
2. Featured content has higher standards than for regular articles, including referencing. Generally speaking, every paragraph in the lead and all statistics should be verifiable through inline citations. I for one like to do random spot-checks of information to make sure that they match the sources.
3. The Tennessee article you mention does not meet current standards; it was promoted 15 months ago. Don't think that everything that is done on that list is "correct".
4. Could you clarify what you haven't done WRT my list of concerns? Thank you. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:10, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I love it that when someone disagrees with an assessment or proposed change they are told to "calm down", this is supposed to be a collaboration and suggestive place, not a "do it my way" critique, this fancy title doesnt mean anything to me, I just thought it would help the wikiproject I'm in. I've gone through peer reviews, and a GA promotion before, to respond with "We're here to help and not create a fight" or "chill out" is unnecessary and inflamatory, if you cant take someone critiqueing your critique then you need to "chill out" yourself. I have the right to take issue and disagree with any suggestion without being labelled as someone who is not calm. NOW I am not CALM in this edit, I acknowledge that. If you have an "oops, I didnt see the references in the column headings" then you didnt look at the list enough to even warrent your opinions to be considered in the first place and probably shouldnt have posted them. I could care less and am now retracting the proposal for FL status. Dabomb, I had no issue with your comments and suggestions and was working on them and will continue to even without seeking FL status because I want this article to be the best it can be and your suggestions are productive, I am not to going to do suggestions from editors blindly just to promote an article however. Truco: your ignorant comments have made me just give up on this promotion. I do not like it when one editor uses the word "we" when defending THEIR opinion, that is arrogant, please say "I". As in- "I" say your comments were ignorant because "Hmm...really? Says who?" is a comment that comes from editors who seriously think that every single fact needs referencing, no they dont, look at the FA article New York City and how many sentences and facts are not referenced BECAUSE THEY ARENT CONTROVERSIAL. Editors who go around saying "oh really, who says that?" arent really challenging info, they simply want references for references sake and I would rather an article not get a fancy title of FA or FL than overload it with reference numbers for things NO ONE is SERIOUSLY challenging. An MSA is not a subjective term that differs in definition between people, it is made by the Census Bureau alone. If something is seriously controversial, unlikely, dubious, counter-intuitive, or extremely detailed, then I agree it should be referenced. I however, do not see the date of incorporation of an upstate New York village of 150 people as falling into any of those categories.Camelbinky (talk) 05:14, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Okay time for a second chance. I think your last post was out of line "you didn't look at the list enough to even warrent your opinions to be considered in the first place and probably shouldn't have posted them" is never an acceptable comment. We are all volunteers and here to help, and I'm sure you have made a mistake in the past, we're all human. I think there are crossed wires over that colour issue. I think Truco was suggesting that the yellowy orange column headers are changed to provide more contrast with the yellow cells. In the list you mentioned the column headers are blue, but I also think that giving them a colour is unnecessary. The years do need references, from WP:V "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth" and I am currently not able to verify the years. I also find the second paragraph a little unclear. I can't understand the difference (if there is one) between Poestenkill, New Scotland which are "Alb.-Sch.-Troy" and Albany etc. which are "Alb.-Sch.-Troy MSA". Finally, in your last post you said "[I] am now retracting the proposal for FL status". Some time has now passed so do you still wish to continue this nomination or have you withdrawn? Rambo's Revenge (talk) 14:51, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I'm withdrawing it. Thanks for quoting only PART of my sentence. The FULL comment had to do with Truco admitting that he didnt notice the references in the columns for the area and population. I stick by my statement that IF you are going to comment on a FL/FA nomination THEN it is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to do a THOROUGH and full job LOOKING and reading FULLY the article/list BEFORE making comments. A mistake is one thing, not being thorough is another. I understood his comment about the color to be against using yellow as the color to code for the central cities of the MSA's. If I forgot on the Poestenkill and New Scotland rows to put MSA after Alb.-Sch.-Troy that is my mistake and I wasnt thorough and I take responsibility for that and will rectify it. As for references, NOT everything needs to be referenced, please see read guidelines again and see various comments on the noticeboard Wikipedia:No original research/noticeboard and Wikipedia:Reliable sources/noticeboard. A reference is needed when something is LIKELY TO BE CHALLENGED, I'm not continuing this discussion but you should really think to yourself of a reason WHY someone would challenge the year a town on this list was incorporated, I am not going to clutter it with references for things that arent likely to be challenged other than by someone who is saying "I challenge it because I want a reference", wanting a reference isnt the same things as saying "that info is unlikely and questionable, please put a reference to prove it". I've already said 99% of the suggestions are ones I agree with and WILL be done to the article because I want the article to be better, but I'm not going to fulfill "references for references sake" editors wishes. On those noticeboards I mentioned (and to which I am a regular contributor) I've noticed the majority is in my opinion on the fact that references are not needed FOR EVERYTHING written on Wikipedia. Verifiability does not refer to the INFORMATION in an article needing to be verifiable, verifiability refers to a REFERENCE being verifiable, facts not likely to be challenged do not need a reference whether it is a start article or a FA! This has gone on too long as it is with comments that I've "gone over the line" which is NOT the way to handle a disagreement, I have the right to disagree and say "I dont believe your suggestion is constructive, you didnt look at the article well-enough, and that particular change you suggested is not helpful for the article" without it being taken as being rude and someone saying I went over the line. Comments like "you went over the line" are over the line as they are considered inflammatory and make the situation worse, wikipedia etiquette guidelines encourage in a situation like that for someone to not point with comments similiar to "you went over the line" for that very reason as it escalates the disagreement. As far as I'm concerned this is over, I'm not getting into an argument over something that shouldve been over the minute I said "no, I disagree and dont feel your change is needed" and shouldnt have been escalated by others, with good intentions I'm sure, commenting further on my style of writting, which I admit can be abrassive and for that I APOLOGIZE but meant nothing further than "no, I disagree and wont do it". Everyone should have left it at that and if not doing the suggestion caused the FL nomination to fail, so be it, I would have been fine with that with no hurt feelings, as I mentioned when I first said I wouldnt do that particular suggestion. This escalation, yes, has made me angry and my posting more abrassive and that is why I am doing what should have been done by everyone else per wikipedia guidelines- I am walking away. I'm taking this off my watchlist, so respond if you must, but I wont be reading it, and please dont bring these bad vibes to my talk page, my happiness is more important than some Wikipedia nomination, there are more important things in life than reading from more editors getting involved and continuing to post these things of "calm down" and "you went over the line" because I disagree with someone.Camelbinky (talk) 21:11, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.