Talk:Kenmore, Washington

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

Article format model[edit]

My edits have been based upon loosely following the Seattle page's model, which is one of the proposed models for city/town entry layout. However, somebody recently screwed up the info box (at least, in Safari), so now I'm a little worried about that idea. Solarbird 01:47, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what you mean[edit]

Hmoul's addition in "neighbourhoods" included the phrase, "resulting in the creation of numerous commercial developments." I'm confused by what you mean here. The housing developments are, of course, commercial. I'm not aware of retail development in the northernmost part of the city, but is that what you mean? (I'm well aware of the downtown changes; I've been going to the public meetings and such. But I'm not seeing those as being driven by the Swamp Creek-area developments in particular.--Solarbird 19:37, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is kind of funny[edit]

Brio Reality, whoever they might be, apparently stole the entire contents of a much older version of this article for their lame real estate page, but apparently can't be bothered to point back here or update their copy. Lame! Solarbird 04:52, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fact archive; add to trivia? Or a new section?[edit]

Kirby Larson's novel Hattie Big Sky has been named a Newbery Honor Book; he's a Kenmore writer. [1]. Fact and source archived here in case there's a reason to add something about that later. —Solarbird 01:00, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Someone added this in the introductory paragraph, which I removed as an ego-edit: "The city is particularly famous for being the home of filmmaker Ian Hubert." However, it is a fact, and if there's ever more than a couple of visual effects credits in IMDB, he could go into a People section. Solarbird 02:00, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citybox added[edit]

I feel kind of silly adding a citybox, but it was fun, so I did it. Does anybody else read this talk page, anyway? I feel like I'm writing in notepad or something. ^_^ Solarbird 03:42, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CITIES assessment[edit]

Hi! I recently assessed this article per WP:CITIES (see the banner above). I assessed it as B-class with a priority assessment of 'low'. B-class is the class on the assessment scale below Good article. The priority assessment is not meant to degrade or disparage the city's importance; it's actually meant as a priority ranking to guide the vast majority of editors towards articles in editing. Usually here, a 'top-class' assessment is for major cities and national capitals, like NYC & Washington, DC. 'High-class' is given to things like state capitals, and cities like Seattle or San Francisco ('major', but not exactly as big as NYC). 'Mid-class' is usually given to a moderately-sized city (pop. of maybe 100,000 to 700,000 or so), with some suburbs surrounding it. Smaller cities might be upgraded to 'mid-class' for reasons of historical significance (like Williamsburg, VA) or a city with a major college (like Flagstaff, AZ). 'Low-class' is usually reserved for a lot of the small towns around the world. The priority assessment has no bearing whatsoever on the article's quality, so these articles have the same chances of getting promoted to GA & FA status as any other article.

The article looks good, and is clearly much more than a 'stub'. Usage of the city infobox, with a reasonably good photo and city seal/flag, etc, increases the assessment. Most of the information is reasonably well-organized into sub-categories (table of contents). There's still several important categories missing, so I can't say the article is comprehensive enough for GA status. For example, a 'government' section is completely absent. The 'economy' section should be expanded.

I'd recommend changing 'civic events' to a 'culture' section, and expanding this section with various culturally-related subsections (see Richmond, Virginia or Louisville, Kentucky as an example of how to do a culture section. The 'media' section should actually be included as a subsection under 'culture', not 'education'.

The 'trivia' section should also be removed, as they are generally discouraged from articles; it's to include a trivia section early in the article's development, so many editors can quickly add information in a simple list-based format. But before achieving GA & FA status, the content of these sections should be integrated into other parts of the article.

There are no inline citations (references) included in the article. The contents of the 'references' section are, in fact, items that are not directly cited by text in the article, so these should actually be included in a 'further reading' section. It might be helpful to review WP:CITE for guidelines regarding how to included inline citations. I've actually fixed the further reading & references sections already,... ;-)

'Neighborhoods' isn't really a general item that should be included as a main section in an article. I'd move this under 'geography'. The geography section also says nothing about the climate. Most city articles have a subsection here covering the climate, or yearly variations in temperature.

The photos look reasonably good, though they're mostly pictures of countryside and lake. Is there a main street in the city? Perhaps a good photo of some of the shops and storefronts in the downtown area? I see there's a lake near the city. Is there a boathouse, fishing piers, marina at the lakeside? Perhaps a city park there? City parks are good to included under the 'culture' section.

Hope this helps. You might want to review WP:WIAGA for information on the criteria associated with a good article. Perhaps sometime in the near future we'll see this article on the list of good article candidates. Cheers! Dr. Cash 23:01, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added Government and Politics section. I think it's kind of done now.[edit]

I think it's kind of done now. I think I found a good location from which to take a picture of the main commercial district, though, or at least part of it, so that might be nice. But really that's about it. Solarbird 05:19, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Still trying to get this photograph to work.[edit]

Kenmore, Washington industrial district (south side of SR-522) from Uplake

Difficult shot to get, only recently possible because a bunch of branches got cut out of a tree, put here so I think of it for later. Solarbird 04:20, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Density issues[edit]

Somebody put in some density-issues commentary in the top part of the article, in the summary. If you want to talk about density policy and impacts, you should put it in Government and Politics, and source it. Solarbird (talk) 22:35, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That was me.Solarbird (talk) 22:35, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thomsen House[edit]

The article currently refers to the Thomsen House as a King County landmark, citing a 2000 article from the usually very reliable HistoryLink. However, in this case, I think HistoryLink made a minor error. King County and Local Landmarks List, King County (undated, last modified 2003-02-26, accessed online 2009-05-08), a document from the County government, says the house is a City of Kenmore landmark, not a county landmark. I will edit accordingly. - Jmabel | Talk 05:32, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Kenmore, Washington. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 08:11, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kenmore, Washington. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 15:05, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Misspelling?[edit]

Please, excuse my poor English, but "The first plaits in the new Uplake neighborhood were sold in 1954." seems to be a misspelling. Could it be that the right sentence would be "The first plats in the new Uplake neighborhood were sold in 1954."? I took this way, because I'm not sure ... --Vorwald (talk) 05:39, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Vorwald: "Plats" is definitely the right word. Fixed it for you. SounderBruce 05:43, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Great! Thanks a lot. --Vorwald (talk) 06:22, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kenmore,_Washington&oldid=1203242917"