User talk:StillWatchesCartoons

Hi,

I have noticed that you made a significant number of edits on both Primary Statistical areas of the US and Combined Statistical areas of the US, and I see a lot of problems with the data that is now in there. Can you please share your source for this data? I am looking at the US Census Bureau data (they have the actual numbers for CSA's), and the data does not match this table whatsoever. For example, New York CSA is somewhere in the 23 millions and has been since 2010. The Phoenix area is not a CSA and shouldn't be on the CSA list (it is only an MSA per Census maps and tables). The Stat. Areas page has 2018 estimates and the CSA Areas page has 2017, but the numbers are exactly the same. Stuff like that. I have proven some of the census numbers by adding up all the counties so I know there is merit to those Census numbers.

Unless you have a better source of data, I highly suggest using the numbers from the below links (CSA's and MSA's are both found via links on this page) and getting this data corrected. Just be sure you are viewing the version of the table that matches the year of your estimate.

https://www.census.gov/data/datasets/time-series/demo/popest/2010s-total-metro-and-micro-statistical-areas.html

Best Regards, 199.64.7.231 (talk) 15:57, 22 May 2019 (UTC) Tyler[reply]

Tyler - I apologize, but I had to undo your revision. As I noted to other editors, per OMB 18-04 effective September 2018, Phoenix-Mesa, AZ CSA was added as a combined statistical area. Also, in the same report, the OMB removed Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA-NJ MSA from the New York CSA, added Modesto and Merced as components of the San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland CA CSA, and added San Antonio-Pearsall, TX CSA. Not to mention dozens of other less noticeable changes, including adding or subtracting counties from individual MSAs/CSAs. OMB 18-04 is properly cited in the article. The population estimates I used are from the latest census estimates effective 2018, which is also cited in the article.

If you notice an 2010 population estimate that doesn't work, we can look at it, perhaps the Bureau revised its 2010 census count, it does happen. Or perhaps my math was off.

On the MSA page, it seems like Wikipedia updated populations but inextricably used previous definitions of MSAs. I was not involved in that process, but personally I would have used the 2018 definitions and not the 2013 definitions.

Thanks!

Paul StillWatchesCartoons (talk) 21:56, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:01, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Canton–Massillon, Ohio, metropolitan area, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Canton. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:57, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, StillWatchesCartoons. Thank you for your work on Severance Center. North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 22:00, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited El Paso–Las Cruces, Texas–New Mexico combined statistical area, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page MSA.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:09, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Logan metropolitan area, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page MSA.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Canton–Massillon, Ohio, metropolitan area, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CSA.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:50, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Longview–Marshall combined statistical area

added a link pointing to Longview metropolitan area

Macon metropolitan area, Georgia

added a link pointing to Georgia

Warner Robins metropolitan area, Georgia

added a link pointing to Georgia

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:16, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per your recent edits, flags should NOT be in the infobox, per WP:INFOBOXUSE. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 19:42, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please elaborate, provide a picture or an example, thanks! StillWatchesCartoons (talk) 17:46, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello StillWatchesCartoons, just a message re your recent moves at Lafayette metropolitan area, Louisiana. Firstly, this name conforms to the convention established quite some time ago after long discussion, that we put the state name at the end where there's ambiguity, otherwise we don't put a state name at all. It is used on all such pages, for example Columbus metropolitan area, Ohio, and would need a fresh discussion if there's to be a change. The prinipal reason is that if you write Lafayette, Louisiana metropolitan area there are those who argue this needs an additional comma after Louisiana. But this is very unwieldy, hence the solution of putting the statename at the end.

Secondly, when you did this edit here: [1] that is known as a WP:CUTANDPASTEMOVE and is not permitted. Reason being that you lose the attribution history from the page. Page moves should always be made by using the "Move" button at the top, not by cutting and pasting. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 15:34, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your pointing to a standard and your reaching out. But putting the state name is clearly not used on all pages--Hastings Micropolitan Statistical Area or Abilene metropolitan area as two examples. So the standard you point out is far from consistently applied.

You don't mention this, but you may have this standard due to attempted disambiguation. However, this argument fails as well. We are sticking a state name on a Wiki title of a metro area of two million-plus people (like Columbus) whereas the smaller New Orleans metropolitan area gets a pass. Few, if any, Wikipedia researchers would confuse Mexico with Mexico, Missouri or even Columbus, Ohio with Columbus, Georgia. That's why we place pictures and maps with our articles.

In my opinion, it should be incumbent on the smaller or lesser known city to have a state name included, or if you want a standard for all 300+ metro areas in the United States, use the OMB approved names, as to keep from these issues being solved by the loudest voice in the room, as you noted the issue with the comma after the state name.

I suggest we reopen a discussion so others can weigh in. StillWatchesCartoons (talk) 17:44, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've had to modify some of your recent edits. Wikipedia style is to use sentence-case, except for proper names and acronyms. You can learn more at MOS:CAPS. Hope that helps! Schazjmd (talk) 17:36, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, if you see any further overcapitalization, feel free to change. Thanks! StillWatchesCartoons (talk) 17:51, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lewiston–Clarkston metropolitan area, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Washington and MSA.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:56, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I made the necessary corrections. StillWatchesCartoons (talk) 17:50, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Seattle metropolitan area. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. SounderBruce 03:51, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I take exception (and some offense) to your calling my edits "disruptive" and needlessly complicated. The map I updated was created/uploaded in 2006 and does not reflect current OMB information. I put a lot of time and effort into my cartography and would have respected an honest dialogue before (a) reverting my map and (b) threatening to have me banned as an editor. I filed an arbitration / dispute request on the matter but Wikipedia has decided to not engage at this time. I will not have an "editor-war" with you, since that would be unconstructive. But my map is always available and can be easily restored.StillWatchesCartoons (talk) 05:30, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The map was in fact updated long after its original upload date. An interactive map is welcome, but there's far too many colors and added complications that confuse readers. If you read the notice, this is not a "threat to ban" you; making accusations against other editors and jumping straight to arbitration instead of seeking dispute resolution or just simply talking is rash and extremely hostile behavior. I am simply following the WP:BRD process, but a refusal to actually discuss means we're at an impasse. SounderBruce 05:56, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bruce - Let's get to the spirit here. You personally called my edits "disruptive" and then you followed with "Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges." These are your words, so yes, that can reasonably be construed as a threat. And this is not because of a flag or a dash, but solely for stylistic reasons as you just mentioned yourself.

Second, you say you are following the BRD process, but the BRD guidelines: "BRD is not a valid excuse for reverting good-faith efforts to improve a page simply because you don't like the changes." The reversion, the commentary in the reversions, and then the threat was no invitation for a good faith discussion. I get it: you have probably made hundreds of edits to this page, added maps and photos and the like, that shows dedication, but such work does not and cannot convey sole proprietorship over a Wikipedia page.

My only failure was not noticing that you made a 2024 change to the 15-year old map. I don't update maps that were uploaded or edited within the past five years to prevent these conversations. StillWatchesCartoons (talk) 06:53, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your request for arbitration, the Arbitration Committee has decided that arbitration is not required at this stage. Arbitration on Wikipedia is a lengthy, complicated process that involves the unilateral adjudication of a dispute by an elected committee. Although the Committee's decisions can be useful to certain disputes, in many cases the actual process of arbitration is unenjoyable and time-consuming. Moreover, for most disputes the community maintains an effective set of mechanisms for reaching a compromise or resolving a grievance.

Disputes among editors regarding the content of an article should use structured discussion on the talk page between the disputing editors. However, requests for comment, third opinions and other venues are available if discussion alone does not yield a consensus. The dispute resolution noticeboard also exists as a method of resolving content disputes that aren't easily resolved with talk page discussion.

In all cases, you should review Wikipedia:Dispute resolution to learn more about resolving disputes on Wikipedia. The English Wikipedia community has many venues for resolving disputes and grievances, and it is important to explore them instead of requesting arbitration in the first instance. For more information on the process of arbitration, please see the Arbitration Policy and the Guide to Arbitration. I hope this advice is useful, and please do not hesitate to contact me or a member of the community if you have more questions. Primefac (talk) 05:39, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about inadvertently deleting your edit at Rochester metropolitan area, New York. I did a bold revert of an IP, and you had made a small edit at the end of it. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 11:27, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Greater Toluca, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rayón.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:11, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Greater Fredericton, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CMA.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:56, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]