Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 12:11, 31 July 2015

Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/WikiProject used

Looking for Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject United States in the Spanish Misplaced Pages? See es:Wikiproyecto discusión:Estados Unidos. ¿Buscando la discusión del Wikiproyecto Estados Unidos en la Misplaced Pages en español? Véase es:Wikiproyecto discusión:Estados Unidos.

WikiProject United States was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 4 July 2011.

Color for the Democratic Party

See the talk page at press time of Template:Democratic Party (United States)/meta/color. Before Eamonster's edit request on 25 June, the color was #3333FF ( ). The edit request, answered by MSGJ, changed it to #00A6EF ( ). The change was opposed by Mitchumch and Byzantium Purple, and I changed it back to the previous color based on the latter's edit request. Mitchumch, for one, thought there should have been a discussion first, so I'll ask all of you: which color should we have to represent the Democratic Party in infoboxes here? APerson (talk!) 18:54, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for fulfilling the two requests. This template has 6575 transclusions throughout en.wikipedia. Given the massive impact of this edit, an active attempt should be made to notify editors across en.wikipedia. Is there a notification template that can be attached to Template talk:Democratic Party (United States)/meta/color to perform that function? Mitchumch (talk) 02:32, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Articles about individual Titles of the US Code

Articles, like Title 9 of the United States Code, don't explain how notable each Title of US Code is. Shall we expand further or propose deletion? --George Ho (talk) 06:48, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

We should expand further. There are countless sources referencing each Title of the US code; all of them are indisputably notable subjects, even if their articles are not well developed at the present time. –Prototime (talk · contribs) 20:38, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

This needs to be addressed at WP:LAW, not here. GregJackP Boomer! 00:28, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

WP:LAW thread here. postdlf (talk) 18:07, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

foreign born American presidential candidates

Do we have an article on foreign-born American presidential candidates that qualify for president? It would be a good overview to work from, and should cover eligibility requirements and why the candidates are eligible. This would include John McCain (born Panama), Cruz (born Canada), and anyone else I can't think of for the moment. And there's the statements that Barry Goldwater (born Arizona Territory) wasn't American enough as he wasn't born in a state. -- 70.51.203.69 (talk) 06:04, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

The issue is covered at Natural-born-citizen clause, which already has sections for everyone you've raised. postdlf (talk) 18:09, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

John McCain wasn't born in Panama. He was born in the Panama Canal Zone, which was considered sovereign territory of the United States, although not a state. This is a minor distinction, but makes him similar to Goldwater. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:12, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

The Panama Canal Zone is part of Panama now, and as of the time he ran for president, so not like Goldwater, since Arizona is still part of the US. It would be like that situation on the TV show "The West Wing" where a bit of a state was given to Canada when the border was redrawn, and questions about the citizenship of the staffer who was born in territory no longer part of the US. -- 67.70.32.20 (talk) 06:27, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Well, not really. United States Federal Law 8 U.S. Code § 1401 - Nationals and citizens of United States at birth, says they were all natural-born United States citizens at birth. The child inherits the citizenship of any parent who is a United States citizenship. Birthright citizenship in the United States. Ted Cruz's mother was born in Delaware, Goldwater's mother was born in the United States. McCain was born on a naval base to United States citizens. — Maile (talk) 13:43, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Coat of arms of George Washington

The naming of the article Coat of arms of George Washington is under discussion, see talk:Coat of arms of George Washington -- 67.70.32.20 (talk) 04:59, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Presidential infoboxes

I'd like to alert members of the project that one user has taken it upon himself to remove most children from infoboxes on every U.S. President -- see this for example. I would like members of the project to know because such wholesale changes should be discussed first, at least in my opinion. Calidum T|C 05:22, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Infobox MOS states that the "Children" field should contain number of children rather than the names of children, unless the children are notable (for our purposes in the infobox, this means having a Misplaced Pages article). It reads: "Only if independently notable themselves or particularly relevant. Number of children (e.g. three or 3), or list of names if notable...For privacy reasons, consider omitting the names of children of living persons, unless notable." The guideline regarding inclusion of children's names is found here. Someone with 2 children but only one child notable would read: "2, including Joe Blow" (with Joe Blow's name in piping that redirects to the article on them). Being the child of a president does not make that child notable (see WP:NOTINHERITED for more). The names of the non-notable children taken out of the infobox should remain in the article body, of course. This is not a "wholesale change", just a change to put the fields of the associated article infoboxes more into compliance. Every edit summary for these changes contained a clear explanation referencing the Infobox MOS. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 16:23, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Eyes needed

• Talk:German declaration of war against the United States (1941)#STRONGLY disagree with point that declaration not in Germany's self interest and
• Talk:German declaration of war against the United States (1941)#Hitler had no choice.
• The article itself could use some attention as well. BMK (talk) 16:41, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Request for comment notice: $44M of $140M raised by Americans for Prosperity in 2012 election from Koch-related funds

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Americans for Prosperity#Request for comment: .2444M of .24140M raised by Americans for Prosperity in 2012 election cycle from Koch-related funds. Please contribute to the request for comment. Thanks. Hugh (talk) 17:19, 9 July 2015 (UTC)Template:Z48

Please help with this request for comment. This is an update to the request for comment and a plea for wider participation. The RfC question asks for community feedback on a one-sentence addition to the funding section of a US political advocacy group, Americans for Prosperity. The main source for the proposed addition is a pair of reports in The Washington Post, supported by FactCheck.org and the National Journal. The proposed content summarizes a key finding of investigative journalism. The discussion of the RfC centers on the due weight of investigative journalism into the sources of funding of a US political advocacy group that is generally not legally required to disclose their funders to the Internal Revenue Service or the Federal Election Commission. Attention from uninvolved editors with some experience with the proper application of WP:DUE is respectfully requested. Generous excerpts from the sources are provided in the statement of the RfC question for your convenience. Thank you in advance for your time and attention. Hugh (talk) 15:45, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

RfC notice: Geographic extent of the United States

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:United States#RfC: Do you agree with the following a) lead sentence and accompanying note for the United States article, and, b) for the info box area.

The proposal is generated by a Request for Mediation, summarized and linked at Talk:United States#Mediation update Misplaced Pages:Requests for mediation/United States. Please contribute to the request for comment. Thanks. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 19:14, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

The New American

We have a recently-created article on The New American - a publication of the John Birch Society - which might benefit from scrutiny from experienced contributors. The article seems to be lacking in any suggestion that the views of such a fringe organisation might be seen as controversial, and appears more than a little promotional in my opinion. I note that it was created by a new contributor with no other significant editing history. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:46, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft lottery (1969)

My first post. The 1969 draft was a conscription, so "all-volunteer" as it says below, seems incorrect:

Origins and consequences In the late 1960s, President Nixon established a commission to recommend the best ways to raise military manpower, to keep the draft or to institute a volunteer army. After much debate within the Nixon administration and Congress, it was decided that an all-volunteer force was affordable, feasible, and would enhance the nation’s security

Steve Henshaw D Steve Henshaw D (talk) 12:42, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Tagging

If I find an article that's part of a related WikiProject, such as WikiProject California, should I also add the banner of this wikiproject to that article's talk page? I'm not sure what your policy is. Compassionate727 (talk) 20:57, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

It should be fine logically, but there's been a big brouhaha here about scope and how WPUSA infringes on more local level wikiprojects, so it might cause a storm in a teapot -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 07:57, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Help needed! I have updated information for the entry on King County Library System

I'm the public relations specialist for the King County Library System in western Washington State. One of our staffers pointed out that the Wiki page for the lirary system is outdated, and I've been assigned to the task.

I have edited and updated the copy, updated and/or changed the links to current information, and swapped the links on each community library to direct users to the libraries, rather than the communities.

I'm aware of the need for neutrality, and have done my best to be completely objective in the information provided, but I offer the information for review by a neutral third party.

The update--with new photograph of a new library--is in a Word file. I have not posted or edited anything on Misplaced Pages yet, and am reluctant to update/edit the article directly without some oversight.

How do I proceed?

Many thanks,

Marsha Iverson

(employed as PR Specialist for King County Library System, also active in many other areas.) marsha.iverson4@gmail.com (MIverson124 (talk) 19:33, 30 July 2015 (UTC))

Suggestion for US state WikiProjects

Hello all! I was curious if anyone else thought it might be a good idea to make a (nonbinding) guideline on how individual US state WikiProjects should organize themselves. Some of the individual state WikiProjects don't look so good and have little content, but a few I think are really good. The front page of the WikiProjects for Hawaii, Massachusetts, Missouri, New Jersey, Ohio, Texas, California, Arkansas are all pretty nice, I think, and might be used as examples. Georgia, Texas, and Massachusetts all have a nice organizational bar at the top. I'm sure with discussion some other additions could be added to a guideline, but I was just curious if anyone thought this was a good and realistic idea first before making a huge guideline. (And nonbinding is the most important part for me, if the community does agree to a guideline for the US State WikiProjects.) JonathanHopeThisIsUnique (talk) 20:39, 30 July 2015 (UTC)