Talk:Cinebar, Washington

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

United States: Washington Low‑importance

	United States portal 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. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

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

For 131.191.144.91

Cinebar is larger than just the bump in the road where the post office is located. It is a large area running from the 508 along Lake Mayflower down to just above where the 12 cuts through Salkum. --Markisgreen 00:03, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Revert of July 24, 2021

Unfortunately I cannot find a Wiki rule or reg that places limits on the supported and properly sourced detail of an unincorporated area's page, much less anything that determines what constitutes a level of "inappropriate level of detail". Backing up that original explanation with the statement that the borders of Cinebar are undefined would not be true, as voting district maps and voting totals going back decades back up that Cinebar has long been recognized as having a distinct voting area, and geographic maps going back to the early 20th century outline the areas borders (shifting, granted, but so does every location's borders and voting districts in the US given enough history).

Therefore no original work was done on the last edit as the voting totals are approved by the county and the state and not by anything speculative. As well, the nearby attractions (which was moved from the lede to its own section) are, well, factual...I mean, look at any map around Cinebar.

Concluding this argument, making the charge of speculation and WP:OP, as well as determining without an accepted Wiki guideline that the information added was inappropriate, is a long stretch and unfounded as well. In accordance with WP:AGF, my original edit that was reverted is restored, with an added voting district map reference and the replacement of the dismissive and condescending word referring to local areas and cities as "settlements".

On a related, but more personal note, I must also add that expanding articles are crucial, not just for the knowledge, and not just for Wikipedia's long history of encouraging participation and new editors (you know, to inspire people to add more information...to an encyclopedia...), but pride in the topic, especially the people influenced or partaking in what the page entails. When we limit a small town, like Cinebar, to strict geographical definitions, determining thru unsupported "judge and jury" declarations, that only a fraction of its history, story, and knowledge can be written down, we do the opposite of what knowledge is. We risk the loss of knowledge. Furthermore, it belittles the people of past, present, and future of any small area. As if they don't matter. Well, I'll be damned to see that happen here at Wikipedia to a good place like Cinebar.Shortiefourten (talk) 05:45, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]