Good Article reassessment

Resolved

Sacred Cod has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ɱ (talk) 05:10, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Kept. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 14:42, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GAR for Spirit of the American Doughboy

Resolved

Spirit of the American Doughboy has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Hog Farm _Talk 13:59, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Delisted. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 14:43, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template talk:US Census population

Hello! There has been a discussion at this talk page for a while now and I figured this might get better traction if posted here. The template at the moment makes estimations based on the 2010 census rather than the 2020 census, so it skews the population estimate percentages (e.g. look at United States#Population, where the 2021 estimate currently shows a 7.5% growth). I was wondering if someone who regularly watches this page could take a look at the matter. Part of the issue is that there are certainly several pages out there using this template that have not updated to the 2020 census, and I was wondering if this project had a way to see which template still needed updating. Thanks for your help! 12.42.50.52 (talk) 16:39, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Population nerds reading this page may be interested in the new Category:Pages using US Census population needing update, a new tracking category for articles about US places that need their census data updated. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:32, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2022 US stock market fall

Should a page be created on this topic? There are a handful of sources for it like [1], [2] and [3]. Mhhossein ^talk 07:26, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How patriotic are Americans

Hey I have scrolled through articles on American patriotism, American nationalism, and American Exceptionalism, and etc. But I haven’t seen any articles address how patriotic are Americans or how many Americans are patriotic despite the fact there are many surveys on this.

From [this,] [this,] [this,] [this,] [this,] and [this.]

I don’t Edit on this topic often so I didn’t want to touch this topic.CycoMa1 (talk) 23:56, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

FAR for Grand Coulee Dam

I have nominated Grand Coulee Dam for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. (t · c) buidhe 04:02, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Memorials to George Floyd

Please help expand the recently created Memorials to George Floyd. Thanks, ---Another Believer _(Talk) 14:44, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

FAR for Anna May Wong

I have nominated Anna May Wong for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. (t · c) buidhe 03:43, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RfC on the end of the American Civil War

Please see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:American_Civil_War#RfC:_When_did_the_Civil_War_end? CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 18:42, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Overcounts and undercounts in censuses

It is well documented that probably all US censuses have had undercounts and overcounts. However, I would like to start a discussion about whether or not we should use figures adjusted based on estimates of overcount and undercount, and not the actual enumerated populations, when listing the populations of the US and its states in the event of statistically significant coverage errors (currently the Census Bureau does not provide this data for cities and counties; however, they did provide county level data for the 1990 census). No states had significant overcounts or undercounts in 2010; however, data released last month found that in 2020 eight states had significant overcounts and six had significant undercounts. For the overcounted states, this data was largely consistent with estimates. For example, the 2020 census enumerated about 800,000 more people in New York State than estimates released just months before had found. And sure enough, the results released last month confirmed that the estimates, and not the actual census, were indeed far more accurate. In terms of undercounted states, the consistency was mixed; some did indeed fall short of estimates, while others were almost exactly on par. The Census Bureau does seem to base its population estimates on the decennial enumerations, regardless of whether or not they are accurate, and the Supreme Court has ruled that only the enumerated population can be used for redistricting; however, other sources that estimate population, such as World Population Review, seem to take adjusted data into account. This begs the question, should we start using adjusted estimates, and not the actual enumerated population, when listing the populations of states by census, especially when there is strong evidence that the adjusted estimates are far more accurate? Bneu2013 (talk) 04:09, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The problem I have with this claim starts with the apparent dismissal of WP policy across all languages: each country's official demographic agency—the U.S. Census Bureau in the United States, the Bundesamt für Statistik in Germany, INSEE in France etc.—is the accepted source for each country's demographics: nation, states/provinces, municipalities. Thus, what World Population Review, Demographia, and other private demographers "seem to take into account" is irrelevant. That there are overcounts or undercounts from an official governmental agency of statistics must be expected. One, the undocumented migrant population is considerable in the U.S., UK, and most other wealthy nations, including continental Europe. Second, the desperately poor, the addicted, and the homeless are 21st-century phenomena in many places. This does impact urban areas especially (whether New York City or Luanda, it doesn't matter). However, any effort to remedy this, while obtaining wide consensus to impose some "corrected" figure over others, is another push toward "righting great wrongs" within the WP project. It opens a Pandora's box on sources and statistics. It promises no greater accuracy, just some editors' idea of "justice". Mason.Jones (talk) 15:40, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The estimates of undercount and overcount come from the Census Bureau, not third party sources that mostly regurgitate data from the Census Bureau. The 2020 census estimates I listed above that were inconsistent with the actual tabulation also came from the Census Bureau. What I am trying to raise here is, what should we do when the official agency responsible for determining the country's demographics claims that they were wrong? In the case of the recent census, there was additional data provided by the Census Bureau that suggested that their enumerations were wrong in some states. What really brought me here was multiple editors have insisted that Illinois's population figure be adjusted based on the estimate that the Census missed about 250k people there. I actually undid some edits there that changed the 2020 enumerated population. I don't know of any other instance where this has come up, but I thought it was something that likely needs discussion. Bneu2013 (talk) 07:47, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If a few editors from one state, Illinois, are disgruntled over their state's undercount, they can add—but not replace—a sentence about it right after the text mention of the official count. In the infobox and historical population, they can add—not replace—the figure with a short footnoted explanation. (If the edits you cited included a full ref, I would have restored the original figure but added theirs after it and why.) That said, proposing a WP policy shift across the board that replaces baseline, official U.S. census numbers is sheer POV, with a dash of righting great wrongs. It also jumps the gun on any future announcement by the U.S. Bureau that the Bureau will (formally) accept its new, adjusted numbers. After census and estimates are published, a handful of experienced WP editors do the huge task of updating U.S. Census stats (down to the municipal level). I shudder to think of the adjusted tables fraught with probable errors, miscopying, and fraud with your proposal as I imagine it. It is wrongheaded on so many levels. Mason.Jones (talk) 17:25, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

FAR for Hurricane Irene

I have nominated Hurricane Irene (1999) for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm _Talk 02:22, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

FAR for School for Creative and Performing Arts

I have nominated School for Creative and Performing Arts for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm _Talk 22:38, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello, Please note that Jazz Age, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 18 July 2022 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team[reply]

Providence

Hello there, WikiProject United States. I’ve came here to tell you that there’s a High-Importance Article of need. Providence, Rhode Island. Providence has sections that need updating,^{[citation needed]} is scattered across the article..I think we need to fix up the page or send it to the Wikipedia:Featured article review. Danubeball (talk) 03:05, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/US related unreferenced BLPs