[go: up one dir, main page]
Wikipedia

Talk:Kent, Ohio

Latest comment: 2 years ago by PrimeBOT in topic Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
Learn more about this page
Featured articleKent, Ohio is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 27, 2015.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 8, 2010Good article nomineeListed
July 31, 2010Featured article candidateNot promoted
September 7, 2010Featured article candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

edit
Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

  This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 19 January 2021 and 7 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): SturrFry.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 01:42, 17 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Place name

edit
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

What do people think of the following in Interesting Facts?

...held in Berkeley Springs, West Virginia|Berkeley Springs, West Virginia

Wouldn't it be better as Berkeley Springs, West Virginia? Or possibly Berkeley Springs, West Virginia? I looked in the style guide, and didn't see an answer there. But what is above with the pipe in between seems unclear to me. Others have edited this in the past, and I wanted to bring it up before editing again. What do you think? Carlif 01:14, 6 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Tree City

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Is Kent really called the Tree City due to Davey Tree? Or is it because of its longtime recognition under the Tree City USA program? --DangApricot (talk) 13:48, 18 September 2008 (UTC)Reply

Growing up here, as far as I have heard and read, it's due to John Davey as he planted a bunch of trees around town and then, of course, established Kent as the headquarters of his company. The source (which is now a dead link) in this article dates Kent officially being proclaimed the "Tree City of Ohio" by the state legislature back in 1949, so it was likely being referred to as the "Tree City" well before then (Davey Tree was established in 1880). Kent has only been a Tree City USA for 23 years and I'm not sure how old that program is, but from their website it seems about 30 years old. --JonRidinger (talk) 17:55, 18 September 2008 (UTC)Reply

Leno source

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Please, folks... some restraint here. If it is true that "[W]ikipedia does not go by the claims of one person of "tape' proof", it is certainly true that Wikipedia does not allow one editor to repeatedly remove a disputed claim because s/he is not satisfied by the source offered. Note your dispute with the claim, and let's move on, please. Through consensus and reliable sources, we'll work it out. -- JeffBillman (talk) 05:03, 21 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yeah all we need is a Reliable Source, not links of jay leno and the show, thats just proving the show exist, not that an episode with the claim exist.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Methron (talk • contribs) 21 February 2009
Look again at the citation. First of all, it's a collection of links that, technically speaking, do not "prove" that the show exists; never mind that the existence of the show is not relevant to this article. Secondly, the citation is an effort to substantiate the claim made in the article; a claim, frankly, that was already substantiated by another source. (I.e. that Kent's water received awards.) If you doubt this claim, the proper thing to do would be to dispute the claim. The most improper thing to do would be to remove it, and revert others' edits more than thrice, as you did. You should note that very clearly violates Wikipedia policy. -- JeffBillman (talk) 05:24, 21 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

GA Review

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago16 comments4 people in discussion
This review is transcluded from Talk:Kent, Ohio/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: WTF? (talk) 23:29, 28 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):   b (MoS):  
    The prose is very well written and only required a few minor copyedits.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):  
    Citations are adequate and meet citation guidelines. One minor issue is that a lot of them are placed in the middle of sentences, instead of at the end immediately following punctuation. Though this is minor and not really required by GA, I think it would be best to resolve prior to an WP:FAC.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
    The article meets the WP:USCITY guidelines and contains all applicable material suggested. The only issue is that the culture section seems very short, and there's no introduction to it. It simply starts with mentioning some festivals. Resolved. WTF? (talk) 19:38, 8 June 2010 (UTC)Reply
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
    The article meets WP:NPOV guidelines. Though I'm not sure it's necessary to mention the Kent State shooting of 1970 in the lead. While it's certainly an important event, isn't it time to move on after about 40 years? Is the city of Blacksburg, Virginia going to mention Virginia Tech as the site of the Virginia Tech Massacre of 2007 for the next 50 years? I'm certainly not suggesting completely ignoring it, and including it under history is necessary. But I'm not so sure that it should go in the lead article of the city itself? Issue resolved -- see explanation below, which is reasonable and well stated. WTF? (talk) 03:43, 8 June 2010 (UTC)Reply
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:  
    The article is stable and there are no signs of edit wars or WP:3RR violations.
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
    The image 'File:Ksuarialshot1.jpg' (Kent State campus) has a tag on it that the categories should be checked. Issue resolved. WTF? (talk) 03:43, 8 June 2010 (UTC)Reply
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  
    I think the article is very close to meeting the six good article criteria and can be promoted once the issues are resolved. I will leave it on hold at WP:GAN until then. Cheers! WTF? (talk) 23:29, 28 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

Comments

edit

On Number 6, I added two categories to the image File:Ksuarialshot1.jpg via Commons. So that one should be taken care of. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 01:07, 29 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

I didn't read the article carefully but I have to comment on #2 above - citations should be after the fact they support, and not in general at the end of the sentences, which can be misleading if a sentence contains several facts and not all are supported by the citation. It's also poor style to stack 2-3 citations at the end of a paragraph rather than after the distinct facts - it makes it more difficult to find the source. II | (t - c) 17:12, 29 May 2010 (UTC)Reply
Yeah I agree about the citations. When writing any article, I try to place them at the end of the sentence or paragraph only when they actually support the sentence or paragraph. When a sentence contains more than 1 cited fact, having them all stacked up at the end of the sentence isn't helpful to verify them. Are there any places you can specifically point out that would be better at the end of the sentence?
As for the mention of the Kent State shootings, that was a more recent addition. If you really feel it's not needed, take it out, but my reasonings for including it were because even 40 years later, it is still something that Kent is known for. Further, a new visitors' center is being opened and there are commemorations yearly, so it still draws people to Kent. While there are outward similarities with what happened at Virginia Tech (students killed on a college campus), the historical context is far different as well as the motive (still debated) and the main players (included a government entity), so it's not comparing apples to apples to use Blacksburg and Virginia Tech with this article. I look at it more like how Oklahoma City makes mention of the Oklahoma City bombing in its intro...true it's more recent, but its definitely something a lot of people still associate with the city and know the city because of even 15 years later.
Re: the culture section- I expanded it slightly to include mention of the May 4 commemoration (a yearly event which drew national coverage this year), the May 4 visitors center being developed, and the environmental festival hosted each year. I modeled it after the Culture section at Hillsboro, Oregon (FA class) which doesn't really have a formal introduction either. I added an introduction sentence, though I'm not sure how much I like it. It's a city of about 30,000 people, so it's not going to have a very large culture section if care is taken to mention only major events. The ones I included are those that are the largest and seemingly notable to more than just locals. --JonRidinger (talk) 05:24, 30 May 2010 (UTC)Reply
In checking the MOS for footnotes, it states the following at WP:REFPUN: "Material may be referenced mid-sentence or at the end of a sentence or paragraph. When a reference tag coincides with punctuation, the reference tag is normally placed immediately after the punctuation..." (emphasis added) --JonRidinger (talk) 03:34, 31 May 2010 (UTC)Reply
While adding numbered citations in mid-sentence may be used by various wikipedians, it's not standard in publishing, and should be avoided. Professional publications put citations at the end of sentences after punctuation. But this isn't a huge issue that's worth holding up GA over. WTF? (talk) 22:52, 31 May 2010 (UTC)Reply
I hope I didn't imply it should hold up the GA review. I've been patiently waiting since May 10 since I nominated it. :) --JonRidinger (talk) 23:42, 31 May 2010 (UTC)Reply
I would also appreciate feedback on the other comments and changes that were made. --JonRidinger (talk) 00:09, 1 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

The article is in very good shape overall, and most issues are now resolved. The culture section looks good, though I made a few minor copyedits and spelling corrections (very minor). The only real issue remaining is with the statement on the "nationally-recognized fashion museum". The language seems a bit 'flowery', and written more in a manner like someone is trying to persuade the reader to visit the museum, as opposed to an encyclopedia article that simply covering the facts. See WP:FLOWERY for Wikipedia's guidelines on this. Other than that, the article looks like it's in good shape. WTF? (talk) 03:49, 8 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I made sure "nationally recognized" has a third-party source so it's not simply a peacock term (which I am always looking out for believe it or not!). Did you find the source unreliable or simply non-supportive of the claim? The source I based that claim off is from a fashion industry website that lists the KSU museum as one of only 6 fashion museums across the US significant to those in the fashion industry. It's much more an assertation of notability than simple promotion IMO. "Nationally recognized" is the only descriptive, potentially POV phrase in the 2 sentences that describe the museum; the rest simply states what the museum has in its collection. --JonRidinger (talk) 04:14, 8 June 2010 (UTC)Reply
I just removed it. If there's doubt about the source, then it probably isn't a good source, at least for that phrase. --JonRidinger (talk) 04:27, 8 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

GA passed

edit

The article now meets all six GA criteria and will be listed at WP:GA. Nice work! WTF? (talk) 19:38, 8 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

A Class

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

With the unfourtunate failure of this article at FAC, I have, per membership of WP:CITIES, pushed this article to A Class as it is clearly an A Class article with all the work done at FAC. Per consensus, I have also pushed the class of the WP:OH template to A Class as well. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:24, 1 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The website www.kentohio.net was previously included in this article, but was removed during the Featured Article Candidate process under the guidelines at WP:USCITY and WP:EL. Basically, external links should be used sparingly and should be from official civic or government organizations. In cases like Kent, that's pretty limited to kentohio.org (city government), kentbiz.com (chamber of commerce), and kent360.com (city government: city manager). Kentohio.net, while a great resource and site, is not an official site of the city. It should be noted that even the inclusion of kent360.com wasn't without opposition. --JonRidinger (talk) 23:47, 26 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

Esplanade mention

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I see that the Kent Central Gateway is mentioned in the Infrastructure section, but it seems that the whole esplanade is notable enough to be mentioned somewhere in the article due to the scope, even if it is still under construction. Mapsax (talk) 16:25, 1 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

It's mostly a matter of just updating the article. When this got FA status, all of that stuff was still in the planning stages. The Esplanade has existed for several years now and is part of the Portage Hike & Bike Trail (which is mentioned). What's under construction is the Esplanade Extension, connecting it to downtown Kent. I have been meaning to do an update of the article anyway, but was waiting for everything to be done or close to done rather than constantly updating the article. --JonRidinger (talk) 18:14, 1 October 2012 (UTC)Reply
OK, it's a bit clearer now. I haven't been sure about the changes, since I've only been back to Kent three times since moving out in '98, the last in May 2010, and am piecing things together from what I read in the Record-Courier. In fact, that's the primary reason why I came to the article in the first place this time, as a WP user, not an editor. That said, since it seems that the complexion of the area from downtown to the university has changed enough that a mention seems appropriate now; it can be altered however much when the project is finished. Mapsax (talk) 04:17, 2 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

Kent State Visitors' Center

edit
Latest comment: 10 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

I'm currently reanimating the broken links on the Kent page. Sadly the Visitors' Center has lost two citations and they're not sitting in the Internet Archive. Is it all right to delete the 2 broken citations and replace with a brand new one? I'd have to reword it slightly as the new citation concentrates more on the 'official' opening on the anniversary. Should I leave the old broken links or delete them to tidy up? Input would be welcome. Thank you, Angela MacLean (talk) 17:45, 25 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

To JonRidinger, thank you for tidying up my last citation. I'll use your citation style as my future template and I'll stop using my old clunky, simple method. To everyone, I've now finished reanimating the dead links here: those that are left can't be reanimated at Wayback/Internet Archive. Best of luck with finding new (hopefully recent) citations. Angela MacLean (talk) 14:44, 27 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for all the updates! Both dead links to the Kent State Shootings visitors' center are newspaper articles, so I simply removed the URL and "accessdate" parameters. Because they are newspaper sources, that means they are also in print, so even without the web address, they are still valid sources, the same as citing a printed book. Any other dead sources that you can't find an archive of I would just leave there with the appropriate "dead link" tag. The link going bad doesn't invalidate the source, but it does let other editors know they need to be looking for an updated source.
Be sure to check out WP:CITET for citation templates and WP:WAYBACK for adding updates from the Internet Archive. Most of what I did was either put some of the references in the appropriate citation template (usually {{cite web}} or {{cite news}}) or add the appropriate parameter for the archive ("archiveurl" and "archivedate"). The "accessdate" parameter on a citation like that you change to the date the archive link was last retrieved. Thanks again! --JonRidinger (talk) 15:45, 27 January 2014 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for the tips & useful links, keep singing : ) Angela MacLean (talk) 23:22, 28 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

TFAR

edit
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Kent, Ohio --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:53, 17 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Assessment comment

edit

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Kent, Ohio/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)Press [show] to view →
As of 05:38, 31 January 2009 (UTC) §hep • Talk rated Kent, Ohio as C-Class. I quick-failed the article under the B-Class criteria under B1 and B4, due to a lack of referencing under the history sections, the sports section, and others. I failed the article under B4 due to some sighted grammatical and spelling errors on a quick pass over the article. It generally passes B2, B3, B5, and B6. I would recommend that you look into nixing the excess coordinates within the text and at the end of the article in place of coordinates_display = inline,title as it reduces inaccuracies and adding

Last edited at 05:47, 31 January 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 21:06, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Kent, Ohio. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:58, 4 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Kent, Ohio. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:56, 12 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Kent, Ohio. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:08, 20 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Kent, Ohio. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:39, 23 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Kent, Ohio. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:25, 6 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

edit
Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:52, 21 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kent,_Ohio&oldid=1207950860"