Talk:Davenport–Moline–Clinton, Muscatine, Iowa–Illinois Combined Statistical Area

On 4 November 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to Davenport–Moline, IA-IL Combined Statistical Area. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Davenport–Moline–Clinton, Muscatine, Iowa–Illinois Combined Statistical Area. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:15, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Updating Population and CSA Ranking Information... and more now

It appears the population and CSA ranking data on this page came primarily from the page Illinois_statistical_areas and its references. But the data on that page is outdated, as are the references (already posted on that Talk page about getting that updated). The full ranking list of CSAs, Combined_statistical_area, is batch updated whenever the Census dept gets new data, so it's a better resource for keeping this page up to date.

I am going through and changing all these population numbers and ranks to the correct figures, with the same Census dept reference that is on the full CSA chart. In the future I'd suggest using the same page as your resource for keeping this one accurate.

Well this is why I don't update the Talk page until I'm done making the changes I'm Talking about. The pages branching off of this one are all using slightly different data, and in many cases out-of-date data. Quad_Cities_metropolitan_area is using 2015 estimates, while the individual page for Davenport,_Iowa is using 2016 estimates, and based on the big CSA table, there is 2017 estimate data out there. Cleaning all of this up is going to take me hours, and I can't spend that much time on it tonight - weird as that still sounds to say, I have homework.

I'm going to put a pin in this, remembering that I still need to update the population and ranking information in the introduction and infobox of Quad_Cities_metropolitan_area, to match the information I changed on this page. And from there on I'm going to create some organizational list of all the pages off of this page, which need their information updated. I'll also try to establish what the most recent estimate figures are from the census department.

If anyone is interesting in teaming up on this, and making a project/task force out of it, I'd greatly appreciate the help. I think it could make all the Quad Cities related pages a lot more accurate, and save future editors some time, if we could maintain a tree of the Quad Cities geographic pages to use for making future updates to statistical data, like populations. That these pages are all being maintained without any organization (that I can find) is making more work than there needs to be. CleverTitania (talk) 03:44, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 4 November 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. (closed by non-admin page mover) Reading Beans (talk) 19:06, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Davenport–Moline–Clinton, Muscatine, Iowa–Illinois Combined Statistical Area → Davenport–Moline, IA-IL Combined Statistical Area – Clinton and Muscatine are not in the name of this CSA; I have checked multiple recent Census Dept sources and all are calling it by the title I am proposing. CleverTitania (talk) 08:13, 4 November 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. Reading Beans (talk) 12:03, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this subsection with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

Move to Davenport–Moline, IA–IL combined statistical area. Per [1] it seems clear the US government calls it "Davenport-Moline, IA-IL Combined Statistical Area". Usually you would want to know what independent reliable sources call something but in this case for an article solely about a government-defined area, I'm happy to go with whatever that authority uses. After that it is simply about stylisation. Category:Combined statistical areas of the United States is a mess of different formats but from it I can see it more common to use state abbreviations, to downcase "combined statistical area" (in particular note the main article is downcased) and of course we need to use a dash per MOS:DASH. Jenks24 (talk) 02:14, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Why not just name it Greater Quad Cities, IA/IL like in the introduction of the article? Killuminator (talk) 09:55, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That was the initial thought I had when I first glanced at this RM. But I ultimately thought it may ambiguous with Quad Cities itself. And then I thought if we were going to name it e.g. Greater Quad Cities, IA/IL combined statistical area for precision / consistency with other CSAs, then we may as well follow what the authoritative source (in this case the US government) calls it. Jenks24 (talk) 10:08, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Any additional comments:

Just wanted to note that I have checked several other CSAs, and there really isn't a ton of consistency in how their wiki articles are named, but the ones that use the actual CSA title as their page name are mostly using the abbreviation of the states, not the full state names. I didn't think to check that before putting up, but did confirm it after the fact. So, I do think leaving it IA-IL is more consistent with other pages, than the current page's use of Iowa-Illinois.CleverTitania (talk) 08:27, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't the general MOS (WP:USPLACE) call for spelling out, rather than abbreviating? Chaswmsday (talk) 09:07, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, do you notice the difference between a hyphen and a dash? —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 21:06, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.