From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 5 March 2019 and 3 April 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): AbigailKGreene, Carw1772.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 13:03, 17 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 1 September 2020 and 11 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Dreyfussa.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 13:03, 17 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Edits to "Economy" Section

Hi fellow Wikipedians,

I added a small paragraph to the Economy section of the page, it contains several statistics around poverty and food insecurity in Winston-Salem along with their citations -- Ame.1772 ( talk) 14:42, 26 March 2019 (UTC) reply

En dash vs hyphen in city name

Have we any sources or style manuals that dictate whether this city's name should use an en dash versus a hyphen? This has been mentioned variously in this talk page's archive ( [1] [2]), but its technical appropriateness hasn't been directly addressed on its own.

Note:

From other cities, and from the denotative purposes of the two marks, I'd think an en dash would be more appropriate? Or if the city has always and only used a hyphen, do we honor their choice? A145GI15I95 ( talk) 00:43, 23 April 2019 (UTC) reply

Those other cases are multiple cities considered as a group. Winston-Salem is the single city that formed as a merger of the previous two towns, Winston and Salem. That is, "Minneapolis–Saint Paul" is not a discrete thing, "Winston-Salem" is. "Winston" and "Salem" no longer exist separately, "Minneapolis" and "Saint Paul" do. -- Khajidha ( talk) 15:19, 15 October 2019 (UTC) reply

RfC about Info Box

There have been several edits to the info box on the page recently (including by myself), revolving around the discussion to delete or keep the major Interstates & US Routes and the Airport in the info box. Myself and the other editor cannot agree, and I wanted to open it up for comment before we continue to undo each others edits.

  • Option 1: Keep the major Interstates & US Routes in the info box
  • Option 2: Remove the major interstate & US Routes from the info box

Sheehanpg93 ( talk) 18:42, 9 June 2022 (UTC) reply

  • This really needs to be a bigger discussion, since in a quick "tour" of major-US-city articles, I see that there's about a 50/50 rate of including or excluding this stuff from the infobox, and we should be consistent about it one way or the other.
    My suggestion is option 2: remove, because it is annoying icon-cruft, and this trivia is not a crucial point that readers need to have to get a good summary of the place. It is meaningless visual blather to almost everyone but that weird camp of highway obsessives, akin to trainspotters.  —  SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  22:20, 9 June 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Remove, nothing to add to what SMc said. MB 23:51, 9 June 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Option 2, particularly because of what SMc argues about it not being a good summary of the city, though I'd not go that far and call those in favor 'obsessives.' SWinxy ( talk) 13:08, 11 June 2022 (UTC) reply
    You'd probably change your mind if you were party to some of the discussions that led to MOS:ICONS. Heh. It was common practice back in the day for a small group of editors to insert highway icons in mid-sentence at every mention of a highway. If that wasn't obsessive, I don't know what is.  —  SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  11:04, 21 August 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Comment I see nothing wrong with the current use in the Infobox. But if that is not wanted by a majority of people, I would propose adding the information to the "Transportation" section of the article as that is where a majority of articles have them. If there is information that can be used on Wikipedia, it should be used, trivial or not (trivial information is still information). I would also like to mention what SMcCandlish said at the end of his comment. Just because you don't like a topic doesn't mean everyone agrees with you and it does not give you a right to go on a rant about those "obsessives" in Wikipedia, which is meant to be a safe inclusive environment for all. DiscoA340 ( talk) 14:35, 11 June 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Option 2 Wikipedia is not WP:INDISCRIMINATE. I really don't see how a list of highways which pass around the city really convey a great deal of good info (the infobox is supposed to summarize the main characteristics of the city). I also agree with SMc that this should probably be a larger discussion. In a WP:GLOBAL encyclopedia, what exactly is a list of route numbers supposed to mean to most non-US, or even non-NC people? Keep the transportation info in the transport section, where such info can be contextualized - Indy beetle ( talk) 03:22, 12 June 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Option 2 per SMc. Nikkimaria ( talk) 03:11, 26 August 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Remove the icons per MOS:ICON. Neutral on the inclusion of the route numbers themselves. Graham ( talk) 02:58, 13 September 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Follow-up comment: The word "interstate" doesn't appear anywhere in the article. US Route 52 is mentioned in a few places, and Spur Route I-285 is mentioned once, but this seems insufficient coverage of this sort of information in the article body.  —  SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  14:35, 12 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk:Winston-Salem,_North_Carolina&oldid=1209691200"