Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities

Telosa has been nominated for deletion, if any project members are interested. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:43, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

There is a discussion at the village pump which involves subjects related to this wikiproject. --Friniate ✉ 18:04, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

This article needs additional citations and the sentences use inconsistent Canadian and American spellings. Also, the section Twin cities#Twin cities may be overly detailed. 2600 etc (talk) 01:56, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

To discuss the spelling issue, see here. 2600 etc (talk) 01:59, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Mahón#Requested move 11 January 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vestrian24Bio 12:13, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Saint Paul, Minnesota has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 03:37, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

Sheffield has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 01:12, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

Meridian, Mississippi has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 01:16, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Nusantara (city)#Requested move 19 January 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Jeffrey34555 (talk) 20:12, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Sankt Pölten#Requested move 25 January 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 01:08, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Bellaire, Texas has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 23:51, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Sankt Aegidi#Requested move 16 February 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 04:20, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:List of urban areas in the United Kingdom#Requested move 10 February 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 05:03, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Bogra#Requested move 13 February 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vestrian24Bio 06:41, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

Where do I find the suggested article formats for U.S. cities and U.S counties.? — ERcheck (talk) 15:06, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia USCITY - • Sbmeirow • Talk • 05:53, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

@Sbmeirow - Thanks. — ERcheck (talk) 14:46, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi all--this editor claims that it is perfectly alright to include the location of a thing mentioned in an article--and to do it in that strange way, by introducing a note system. The editor claims, as far as I can tell, that Wikipedia:WikiProject_Geographical_coordinates#Usage_guidelines states that every thing that has a location and is mentioned in an article can be given coordinates in the article. I disagree. I can't imagine what our articles would look like if that were the case and someone took it all the way. Drmies (talk) 21:25, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

I also Disagree with that editor. GeographicAccountant (talk) 22:06, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

To clarify, Drmies mis-states my objection to a deletion made to an article, originally with no explanation, and subsequently on the grounds it was "burdensome and excessive".

I previously advised that the guidelines do not suggest coordinates be included for every location. Instead my objection was to the unilateral and summary determination of "excessive", as that it completely disregarded the guidelines. Both independently and read together Wikipedia:WikiProject Geographical coordinates#Usage guidelines and WP:USCITIES expressly state geolocations for points related to the topic may be (respectively) "appropriate" and "acceptable".

It appears that Drmies contends that geolocations must never be included in content, and for some reason the text of the guidelines, which include specific examples, otherwise provide insufficient guidance. Furthermore, previous unrelated discussions with editors who frequent this forum opined that including the information in the main content made the text too awkward to read, and that instead it could be included as a note, as per H:NOTES.

I would appreciate your revisiting this more accurately posed topic, and most importantly, always appreciate any guidance and specific alternatives. (please note, despite extensive research, there is insufficient sourcing to support a stand-alone article.) Kyle4344 (talk) 23:56, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

"It appears that..." no. I've written hundreds of articles on locations and places and buildings, and included coordinates. The silliness here is that you are including coordinates for things mentioned in the article. I'm pinging a few experienced editors most recently active on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geographical coordinates: User:Joy, User:Deor, User:The Anome, User:Jonesey95. Perhaps they can address this relatively simple matter. Drmies (talk) 12:56, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification. It underscores that your objection is to "including coordinates for things mentioned in the article."

To underscore my concern, the above cited guidelines, both independently and read together expressly allow that geolocations for other points related to the topic may be "appropriate" and "acceptable", and provide additional guidance by example. My objection was that you summarily and unilaterally deleted the content without reference to any authority that supports your deviation from the cited guidelines.

I appreciate your submission of this particular query to the appropriate forum, but point out that any change in philosophy will involve the more global obligation to revise the guidelines. Again, I must note that your reference to "silliness" and "relatively simple matter" in your response comes across as unnecessary and condescending. WP:CIV Kyle4344 (talk) 15:19, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

A good example of location coordinates for individual features being usefully embedded within articles are the various lists of listed buildings in the United Kingdom such as Grade I listed buildings in Buckinghamshire. — The Anome (talk) 13:14, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Support Drmies. Those coordinates shouldn't be there. If the location is notable, it has its own article and coordinates are there. If it is not notable, it is pointless to have them there (even if in a note). FromCzech (talk) 13:18, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

There is a legitimate use where the objects in an article may not be individually notable, but the subject of the article, which includes them all as a collection, is. For example, it would be interesting to have coordinate footnotes for the individual statues in the Dragon boundary mark article. — The Anome (talk) 13:37, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

I think coordinates like these are good to have in a list like Grade I listed buildings in Buckinghamshire, and Dragon boundary mark (or whatever the title of that article ends up being) should be turned into such a list. The coordinates themselves are I think all available here. I also intend to add all the applicable ones to the list of public art in the City of London one day. Statues of the Liberators is an example of a list to which I've recently added coordinates and {{Mapbox}}. Ham II (talk) 19:04, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

What FromCzech said. If the place is notable, link to its article, where editors can find its location and other information. It is long-established that list articles can have coordinates in tables like the one that The Anome. But putting a geolocation for a non-notable place in article prose or in a note is usually excessive. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:52, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your insight. However, your response stops short of the bright line favored by User:Drmies and User:FromCzech. This circles back to the underlying question of what is "excessive".

Can you advise what, if any, issue you have with relying on the guidelines in WP:USCITIES as to what is acceptable (and by implications, what is excessive)? Kyle4344 (talk) 17:17, 13 March 2026 (UTC)