Jump to content

Talk:List of municipalities in Rhode Island

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by EdJohnston (talk | contribs) at 18:14, 13 October 2018 (→Report of Edit Warring: Trying to list some of the items in dispute. Original founding dates ought to be sourceable). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Featured listList of municipalities in Rhode Island is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 21, 2017Featured list candidatePromoted


Include populations?

It would be nice if populations were included with this list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.30.138.128 (talk) 00:32, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Foster/Glocester

I removed the part about Foster and Glocester sometimes being referred to as Ponaganset. Unless somebody can source that, I can't help but to think it is not true. I have often heard them talked about together aka "no school Foster/Glocester" due to the towns sharing a school district, but never referred to simply by the name of the high school.68.9.130.10 (talk) 01:35, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Providence, RI skyline.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Providence, RI skyline.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests August 2011
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:16, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of municipalities in Rhode Island. 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) 04:47, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Recent changes by Dilidor

User:Dilidor made some changes and I just want to explain the revert. Almost all of what was chanced was factually incorrect. For example, claiming there are 3 forms of government, when the Home Rule Charter states: "Rhode Island’s municipalities operate under 4 different forms of government: 1) mayor-council, 2) council-manager, 3) administrator-council and 4) town council-town meeting. " Changing dates from sourced official sites [[1]] to completely unsourced dates, etc. Also moving an image into the reference section is against the style required for featured list status. I hope this explains the revert. Mattximus (talk) 00:34, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Mattximus: Your huge reversion was utterly unacceptable. If there are specific details that you disagree with, change them individually. I made a great many edits, the vast majority of which were improvements and necessary corrections. A large percentage of the dates are wrong and need to be corrected. You contend that my corrections are unsourced—but most of the wrong dates are already unsourced. The images shredded the article's layout, and that's the reason why I moved them down. The map appears to be in the reference section, but it's not. Nonetheless, to alleviate your concerns, I will move it up to the top where it ought to be in the first place. Now if my edits have produced any inaccurate information, edit it individually rather than a wholesale revert. —Dilidor (talk) 10:34, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have now moved the map to the top and the gallery to the bottom—where galleries belong—and have restored the fourth form of government, despite the fact that it does not exist in RI. If some of the date changes are inaccurate, kindly address them individually. The countless other edits that I made are improvements. —Dilidor (talk) 10:42, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that your edits you made did not change the source. For example if you want to change if from 4 forms of government to 3 forms of government you also have to change the source, which states 4. And yes your change did move an image into the reference section. All the dates were accurate to the source, so every single one of your changes (each one was unsourced!) had to be reverted. You didn't add a single source for any of your date changes. You also made some linking changes that are unexplained and make this list different from all the other list of cities. Let's discuss any specific changes you would like to make here before beginning an edit war. At the very least you need to source your changes. Mattximus (talk) 10:50, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I did not change it from 4 to 3—I reverted it to 4 and restored the fourth form! I do not understand what you are suggesting when you write "you also have to change the source". The image is not in the references, it is in the into! Did you even look at the changes which you most recently have wantonly reverted? And if "all the dates were accurate to the source", then that "source" is utterly unreliable. The article initially claimed that Providence was established in 1832! That is utterly ludicrous! What is your source for that absurd date? —Dilidor (talk) 16:42, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This is a list of municipalities and the source gives incorporation dates of those municipalities (click the reference for Providence, and then explain why you think the official Rhode Island website is "ludicrous"). The problem with many of your efforts are that you are changing them without giving a proper source. Also with respect to formatting (be it linking and moving around the images), these were already discussed during the featured list nomination and this was the conclusion. I do welcome any changes that are sourced, but if you want to make sweeping changes to the format, please discuss here first, before changing a featured list. Your changes could cost the list featured status otherwise. Mattximus (talk) 23:39, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Clarification on my recent revert. You changed the official name "council-manager" which is the language present on all official documents, with "council and manager" which is not. Unless you provide a source for this new terminology, this is the example of adding something that is factually incorrect. Mattximus (talk) 23:42, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ok now you reverted with no explanation. Your revert uses the term "council and manager" which is not the official name for this type of government. All the sources use "council-manager". Please stop edit warring, if you really want this change you will need a source. Mattximus (talk) 11:25, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"I do welcome any changes that are sourced". I appreciate your magnanimous generosity. This article clearly belongs to you. I have asked you several times to name your source and you only reply with vague references to "the source" and "the official RI website". You also appear to be ignorant of RI history and the fact that Providence was established by Roger Williams in 1636. That is what is ludicrous in the absurd date which you continually revert to without resolving it here. Desist from your edit warring and discuss it here. Dilidor (talk) 12:32, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
First you have a history of edit warring, which leads me to believe this isn't your first target. Second, every date is sourced in the article itself, you just have to click the reference. Second you also didn't read the column note which shows that these are incorporation dates, since the article is about incorporated municipalities. Before you continue your edit war, please click and read the reference for that date. Mattximus (talk) 13:17, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how to get this notion through to you: there is no "note" or source on Providence! I have asked you at least three times: what is your source? And you continually evade with non-answers telling me to "read the note" which is not there. If you cannot provide a source, then the date stands at 1663. —Dilidor (talk) 12:45, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You don't have to ask me, you just click on the little 6 or 7 (the references were there the whole time, you just never clicked on them). I cross-referenced all dates with those two references, you just have to click on the little number right beside Date Incorporated. Again, you have a history of edit warring, so please stop adding dates without any sources, and changing the wording (from council-manager to council and manager) that not only is incorrect but breaks the wikilink. Mattximus (talk) 22:38, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
OK this is getting ridiculous, it's council-manager, not council AND manager (as per all sources cited). You changed the terminology but provided NO references to back it up, then broke the wikilink to council-manager. And you can't add founding date to a column called incorporation date, that makes no sense. Columns are for 1 concept. Please discuss changes one at a time on here first, because the changes you are making will mean that this list no longer meets featured list standards because of random fact placement, unsourced changes, etc... Mattximus (talk) 00:18, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Changes proposed by another editor

Please place changes here that you want to make. Your edit warring (and history of edit warring on other pages) means that the article will be more stable if done this way. And remember to source your changes (see council-manager above where you did not). Mattximus (talk) 00:18, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are suffering under the delusion that this article is your property and that you have some level of authority concerning it. I will make edits to it myself, but thanks for offering to hold my hand in the matter. —Dilidor (talk) 13:30, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Going to hop on here and say that I relinked most of the unlinked stuff in the intro paragraphs. —JJBers 23:34, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@JJBers: Please see my reply on Connecticut talk page in this regard. —Dilidor (talk) 10:48, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
OK now two people are reverting your weird changes. Wikipedia is more useful when you can wikilink to pages that offer specific definitions, for example council-manager. Also I reverted because you left broken links with random unclosed brackets (]]) in the middle of a sentence. Again, this is a featured list, so adding random ]] is making the article worse. Mattximus (talk) 11:21, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I also couldn't find your discussion. What Connecticut page are you referring too? 11:24, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
Also some of your grammar changes are not bad, I just have to revert when you introduce broken links or remove important wikilinks. Mattximus (talk) 11:26, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"I just have to revert when you introduce broken links or remove important wikilinks". NO!! That is the whole point of this problem—you do not revert to fix a small problem, you fix the small problem. But instead, you persist in wholesale reversions of a vast amount of work which repaired some gross problems with layout, grammar, syntax, spelling, ad infinitum, ad nauseum. If I inadvertently left a misplaced bracket—remove the bracket! Really, it's that simple.
On a separate note, do not call out a user by name in the header. Ever. —Dilidor (talk) 11:57, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Report of Edit Warring

Now that User:Dilidor has reported me for edit warring we can both no longer edit this page without agreement. Since this page now contains broken links and is much worse than before, I suggest returning to the last stable state which was the edit by Rhododendrites on 19:07, 25 July 2018 before we both started this back and forth. I believe returning to last stable state is standard procedure when an edit war has been declared. Is there an objection to this? From here we can work together on any changes as per the edit war result. Mattximus (talk) 12:48, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am also open to using 3O Wikipedia:Third opinion, or other dispute resolution procedures such as Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard. Starting from the neutral edit by Rhododendrites seems like a good place to start but I wont do this until we both agree on this neutral starting point. Mattximus (talk) 12:51, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It may be helpful to list out some of the items in dispute. There have been so many reverts since 1 October it is hard to know where to begin. But I think that User:Dilidor is objecting to the '1838' date for Providence. Even though the table header marks this column as 'date of incorporation of the current municipal status'. It is generally believed that the city was founded by Roger Williams in 1636. (Notice the web site at ri.gov). Maybe there could be an additional column that serves as a kind of historic founding date. It seems there used to be a bunch of historic dates in the article, but they had to be removed in late 2017 due to a lack of sources. Is there any way to restore any of the historic information? Does anyone have proper sources? EdJohnston (talk) 18:13, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_municipalities_in_Rhode_Island&oldid=863883982"