Talk:Mankato, Minnesota

Minnesota High‑importance

	Minnesota portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Minnesota, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Minnesota on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MinnesotaWikipedia:WikiProject MinnesotaTemplate:WikiProject MinnesotaMinnesota articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

Archives

/Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mankato, Minnesota. 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.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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) 01:37, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Feel like this should be added[edit]

There is a website (http://city-mankato.us/) that is seemingly popular. The site is a joke, but the existence of this site should at least be mentioned--Helloimahumanbeing (talk) 15:01, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Motto[edit]

The motto "Now Playing" was removed because it's a slogan from the visitor's bureau, so not actually the city motto. I'm wondering if "Leading the way..." would be considered the motto instead? It's there on the official logos at the official city website and the longer version of "Leading the way as a prosperous diverse regional community" is found on the official city LinkedIn. Both versions are used across a variety of city publications. Thoughts? Pinging @Brossow: because they removed the "Now Playing" slogan and might have thoughts on adding "Leading the way...". Woodroar (talk) 17:39, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and added this. Woodroar (talk) 22:33, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Parody web site[edit]

I have twice tried to have this and undone edits to remove it. Michael Golrick (talk) 18:39, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have tried to add this multiple times. The last removal said "This is one person's opinion" and I would retort - it is more than one person, and it is the only thing that many people will hear about Mankato. Michael Golrick (talk) 11:48, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is probably worth covering, but we really need better sourcing. Right now, it's a single local news article, which suggests that it's trivial enough to be UNDUE. The parody site mentions coverage in this New York Times article but that gives a different URL. I'm also seeing mentions of other coverage but I can't find them online, and the versions hosted at city-mankato.us are copyright violations. I mean, there's also the issue of whether or not we should trust a website that was (supposedly) created to show that you can't trust everything online. No matter what, I certainly don't think we should link to the site itself. Let the sources do that. We're not a directory, after all, and our guidelines on external links to avoid #2 and #11 suggest it's inappropriate as well. Woodroar (talk) 13:03, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the link again for violating WP:ELNO. As far as I can see, there's no reason to include it. It's not a useful source—in fact, it's the opposite—and we're not a directory. Curious readers can copy and paste it. Woodroar (talk) 23:52, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't decided whether to give up on this yet, but I would point out that using a NYTimes link violates WP:ELNO since the NYT has a pay wall. That is why I did not link to it. Not sure what copyright violations are alleged at the bogus site ... but I am not a copyright specialist.

I would note that there is a comment above ("Feel like this should be added") which is what I responded to by adding the site link and comments. Michael Golrick (talk) 15:33, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think we're talking about several different things here.

Should we add an external link to city-mankato.us? Certainly not. It doesn't meet any of the criteria at WP:ELYES or WP:ELMAYBE, and it fails #2 and #11 of WP:ELNO because it's factually inaccurate and a personal webpage.

Should we mention city-mankato.us in the body of the article? Probably. We currently do, of course, though the sourcing isn't great. There's the Mankato Free Press, a newspaper but a local one, which always has caveats. Then we've got The New York Times, a newspaper of record and generally reliable source, but it's a rather trivial mention (4 paragraphs out of 37) so WP:UNDUE is a concern. That article is also long out of date and gives the URL as www.lme.mankato.msus.edu/mankato/mankato.html. Are we talking about the same site? Probably. But as a source, the NYT isn't not very useful. Now there are other sources mentioned near the bottom of city-mankato.us—multiple articles at the Mankato Free Press, one at the Star Tribune, etc.—but those links go to pages hosted at city-mankato.us and not to the actual news sites. That is the copyright violation, if those are indeed actual news articles at all.

Should we add an external link to The New York Times article? No, and I'm not sure anyone is suggesting that. We'd use that as a source, though I still think it's of questionable value. Woodroar (talk) 18:00, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]