Jump to content

Talk:Pennsylvania

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articlePennsylvania was one of the Geography and places good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 25, 2007Good article nomineeListed
October 24, 2009Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article

Split proposed

[edit]

The Economy of Pennsylvania is a topic of particular current interest. Here are some potential sources of information:

-- M2545 (talk) 13:27, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello M2545. It is over a year since you proposed the above split. If you are still planning to undertake that split, please consider going ahead. Otherwise, please consider whether retaining the "split" tag has any value. (Generally, as you know, those tags are intended to sign-post interested editors to an active discussion. There doesn't appear to be an active discussion. And so I personally wonder if that tag has much use.) Guliolopez (talk) 00:39, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
OK. It's been well over a year now, and there has been no discussion on whether a split might occur (or consensus on how it might be undertaken). I've removed the tag (the "signpost" to this discussion) as, in effect, there is no active discussion underway. Someone can restore if/when/as the discussion is opened/reopened. Guliolopez (talk) 20:20, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Landlocked

[edit]

Pennsylvania is NOT landlocked. The Port of Philadelphia is in Pennsylvania. Please correct. Art4242 (talk) 22:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Art4242: And Erie, Pennsylvania, is on Lake Erie, which connects to the Welland Canal, which connects to...well, you know. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:04, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Penisylvania" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Penisylvania and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 25#Penisylvania until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. TartarTorte 19:38, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Too many images

[edit]

The history section has too many images, and several historical images are pushed into the geography and climate section, leaving unnecessary white-space. There's also the random image of John Morton, which does not even apply to demographics. - TheLionHasSeen (talk) 19:41, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Magnolia677 it appears Keystone18 doesn't understand that you can align some images to the left, and seemingly doesn't yet understand that there's still too many images. Same for the Philadelphia article's history section pushing content down. What do we do now? Bring it to a discussion board with others? - TheLionHasSeen (talk) 02:57, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bloated lead, with 12 citations

[edit]

Lead is too long; too detailed; excessive statistics; a Lead should not have 12 citations; material can be incorporated in other sections

Vicedomino (talk) 22:00, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Continuous disruptive editing, assumed ownership and manipulation narrative

[edit]

Keystone18 has, for a series of months, operated in a mode of claimed ownership over this Wikipedia article. As discussions regarding this have been held on their talk page for imagery regarding this article and others—dating as far back as January 2023 between themselves and Pi.1415926535, Famartin, and Magnolia677 (evidence here), today they have attempted to manipulate and control the narrative regarding their disruptive editing and poor summaries by removing screenshots detailing what they were still refusing to acknowledge of the article being messed up by placing every image to the right (as evidenced, here). Refusing to sacrifice my character for the complete disregard of other contributors, I am posting this here to suggest by consensus that imagery is not always placed to the right as argued by them—and enforced by them through reverting everyone, specifically me. I will provide screenshots showing the results of their contributions in contrast with mine; I am also planning to forward this to the administration too, though I do acknowledge by procedure I will be likewise warned/reminded to not engage in edit wars—yet, apologizing, I also respond it seemed as if devil's advocate was the only choice.

  • Contribution by Keystone18, which pushes history and geographic content down, and adds unnecessary blank space.
    Contribution by Keystone18, which pushes history and geographic content down, and adds unnecessary blank space.
  • Images when placed to the left, which are proper according to their sections and does not push the content down. Image captions match the sub-sections.
    Images when placed to the left, which are proper according to their sections and does not push the content down. Image captions match the sub-sections.
  • Another example of my contributions, when placed to the left.
    Another example of my contributions, when placed to the left.
  • Third example of my contributions, when placed to the left which keeps this sub-section of history's images and captions properly placed.
    Third example of my contributions, when placed to the left which keeps this sub-section of history's images and captions properly placed.
  • Fourth of example of my contributions, which doesn't impede on the geography section nor those following.
    Fourth of example of my contributions, which doesn't impede on the geography section nor those following.
  • The final example of my contributions in contrast to Keystone18's narrative on their talk page and in edit summaries, revealing a properly formatted article.
    The final example of my contributions in contrast to Keystone18's narrative on their talk page and in edit summaries, revealing a properly formatted article.

Judge this as you all will. - TheLionHasSeen (talk) 17:03, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And yes, I undid my revision to their talk page, allowing them to continue to maintain their own narrative. As the saying goes, give someone enough rope. - TheLionHasSeen (talk) 17:04, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This has continued yet again, so here's how this will be handled: are you User:Keystone18 here to help build an encyclopedia, or impede? TheLionHasSeen (talk) 23:06, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I see no crowding in that screenshot, and neither has anyone else to my knowledge. Keystone18 (talk) 20:59, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The only problematic image is the one on the upper left with excessive white space, but none of these are even of the sections in which you moved images. Keystone18 (talk) 21:02, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

There is a statement in the opening section that Pennsylvania has the most navigable rivers of any U.S. state. There is no cite for the claim, and it is not expanded upon anywhere else in the article. I've commented the statement out rather than deleted it at this point, as I have not contributed to this article before and am unaware of any discussions regarding this claim (though nothing appears in a search of the talk pages). Besides the lack of a cite, it's unclear what constitutes a navigable river. The Susquehanna, for instance, is shallow and rocky over much of its length, and the Genesee, though perhaps navigable downstream in New York, is just headwaters in Pennsylvania. Does anyone have any further info on this claim? Ken Gallager (talk) 17:35, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pennsylvania&oldid=1240542093"