This article is written in
American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other
varieties of English. According to the
relevant style guide, this should not be changed without
broad consensus.
Pennsylvania 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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Pennsylvania 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.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Appalachia, a collaborative effort to increase coverage of
Appalachia and the
Appalachian Mountains. If you would like to participate, go to the project page to see a list of related articles needing attention.AppalachiaWikipedia:WikiProject AppalachiaTemplate:WikiProject AppalachiaAppalachia articles
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
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
Sponsoring
Would redners want to think about sponsoring a new NASCAR driver? I work for redners and my grandson is semi pro. Needs sponsors for actual NASCAR
2600:1005:B197:2C8A:1B2A:9B40:1772:3AF0 (
talk) 01:00, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Bloated lead, with 12 citations
Lead is too long; too detailed; excessive statistics; a Lead should not have 12 citations; material can be incorporated in other sections
Continuous disruptive editing, assumed ownership and manipulation narrative
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.
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.
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.
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.
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