This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
cities,
towns and various other
settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all
list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the
project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Rainier is a code city, according to the
Municipal Reserarch and Services Center and the lady answering the phone at the city. I'm unable to find this documented online though. There was a
referendum in 2000 on becoming a code city, which apparantly
lost.
File:ImagesCAU895L8.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion
An image used in this article,
File:ImagesCAU895L8.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at
Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?
Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (
commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
The
Municipal Research and Services Center (MRSC) generally appears to have the most up-to-date listing of cities and towns in the state. The following places are listed as cities there but not by the 2010 U.S. Census:
I would think it would be informative and sensible to include a column in this list showing whether each city is a first-class city, a second-class city, a code city, or, in the case of Mattawa, an outlier. The information at
this page is suggestive but inadequate/incomplete. --
Haruo (
talk)
16:56, 18 April 2016 (UTC)reply
Thanks, SounderBruce! I think merging the towns list makes very good sense. I'll only be working on this topic, to any great extent, in eowiki, but I will indeed work on it there with the goal of integrating the various kinds of
urboj and
urbetoj into a single list that shows which class they are. I might even add in the CDPs, neighborhoods, and other inhabited-place toponyms. --
Haruo (
talk)
14:03, 12 May 2016 (UTC)reply
This struck me as irrelevant minutia that detracted from the article, almost to the point where I deleted it. What value do you see in having this information here? It seems of no interest to anyone, save perhaps a lawyer who specializes in such details.
130.44.142.234 (
talk)
11:48, 18 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I certainly have no objections; it seems like it should be much more helpful than troublesome for typical users. Whoever they are. --
Haruo (
talk)
02:53, 21 June 2016 (UTC)reply
I've been working on these lists, trying to bring them all up to featured list status (including 2 of the 3 you mentioned!). I was planning on doing these mergers for any state that divided it's incorporated divisions into multiple pages (where reasonable). I'm also doing the reverse and creating new pages for non-incorporated places (CPDs) or the lists would be way too long. I support this merger.
Mattximus (
talk)
19:01, 2 August 2016 (UTC)reply
I would be happy to lend you a hand in getting this list up to featured status, as it has been on my mental to-do list for quite a while. SounderBruce23:42, 2 August 2016 (UTC)reply
Sure, that sounds great. What do you think about the format I chose for
Montana? I know the data from 2010 is a bit out of date, but I still prefer using actual counts over estimates. I also used templates so that the census in 3 years will be able to be inputted quickly and accurately, bringing the whole list up to date. If you like this format, I'll set it up and we have have a go.
Mattximus (
talk)
13:17, 3 August 2016 (UTC)reply
Ok so I expanded the lead and moved images to galleries, I think we need to do 3 main things to bring this article up to standard:
1. Clean up the lead and include sources, some are found in the external links, some will have to be dug up.
2. Merge the two list pages into one.
3. Format pictures (find better pictures?), including captions. If possible find a map that has the municipalities outlined, but this may be hard.
4. New list format, what do you think of this proposed one?
^
abcdeCite error: The named reference Census 2010 was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).
What do you think of this plan?
A map of municipalities could be made using Census data. As for the list format, I think it looks good, but I would use a colspan for the Population to save a bit of width. Also, I believe that using estimates would be a better indicator of population than 16-year-old census data, since Washington state and her cities are growing at a
very fast rate (
especially Seattle and her suburbs between 2010 and now). SounderBruce04:16, 4 August 2016 (UTC)reply
Colspan sounds good, I can incorporate that into the list. Now I agree that that statistics from 2010 are 6 years out of date, however there are a few problems with using estimates. First, estimates are not really considered "encyclopedic" and will likely not pass at featured list review. The tradition there is to use the latest census or official registrar data (it's just unfortunate the USA only collects once every 10 years). In a few years the data will be up to date. The 2000 data is just to show longer term trends in population growth. It wouldn't be very informative to include change over a year or two, since that goes up and down all the time. Second, the program I wrote that automatically pulls from the United States Census page can only pull from official censuses, the formatting of the estimates is different (for some reason) and it messes up the pull. If we did choose estimates, it would have to be done by hand, which would take hours and hours... What are your thoughts? Just as an example, this morning I tested out the bot on
List of municipalities in Wyoming, it made the table in seconds.
Mattximus (
talk)
18:25, 5 August 2016 (UTC)reply
Image captions don't match table
Rankings in the city images captions do not match the table. For instance Everett is seventh in the 2019 estimates, not sixth. I wonder if including the rank in the caption is more trouble than it is worth, given probably annual changes in the list. -
Bri.public (
talk)
21:58, 7 August 2020 (UTC)reply
I believe the rankings are based on the census data? We really shouldn't be including 2019 estimates anyway, and stick with census counts. New one coming in a few months!
Mattximus (
talk)
22:04, 7 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Recent Edit Reversals
I agree with SounderBruce but for another reason: when updating from the census, the municipalities are listed alphabetically, and so updating this list becomes a headache if listed by population. Also, their original reasoning, that it can be sorted with a click, is also reason enough not to rearrange. On a side note, it would be great to merge the two tables into one to make the sorting more comprehensive.
Mattximus (
talk)
01:37, 14 September 2023 (UTC)reply