From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| Boston
is a
featured article
; it (or a previous version of it) has been
identified
as one of the best articles produced by the
Wikipedia community
. Even so, if you can update or improve it,
please do so
.
|
| This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as
Today's featured article
on June 21, 2007.
|
Article milestones
|
---|
Date
| Process
| Result
|
---|
June 2, 2005
| Featured article candidate
| Not promoted
| June 9, 2005
| Peer review
| Reviewed
| October 12, 2005
| Peer review
| Reviewed
| November 4, 2005
| Featured article candidate
| Promoted
| May 14, 2007
| Featured article review
| Kept
| March 21, 2013
| Featured article review
| Kept
| Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's
Main Page
in the
"
On this day...
"
column on
March 20, 2004
,
September 17, 2011
,
September 17, 2015
,
September 17, 2020
, and
September 17, 2022
.
| Current status:
Featured article
|
|
|
| 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.
Cities
Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities
Template:WikiProject Cities
WikiProject Cities articles
| | | This article is supported by the project's
regional capital taskforce
.
|
|
|
| |
Is it really
WP:DUE
to include Boston's failed Olympic bid in the history section? :3
F4U
(
they
/it
) 14:38, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- Looks fine to me. It's three sentences, it hardly throws the article out-of-balance. --
Jayron
32
15:33, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
[
reply
]
New user Pinehillwetu just added the original name used by the Massachusett peoples for the area now known as Boston. This doesn't appear to be the standard as few if any other articles for major U.S. cities include their original native names. Do we keep the name or remove it? I'm leaning towards removing it or mentioning/listing it somewhere else just for consistency.
RyanAl6
(
talk
) 21:37, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- The Massachusett language is still spoken, and the Wampanoag nation is a federally recognized tribe. Its wholly appropriate as other countries have city names written in native or local languages despite those languages not being either official languages or officially taught in school to children. Additionally, not every US city has an indigenous name as some of them were founded only after colonists came, and not before.
Pinehillwetu
(
talk
) 03:29, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- Please stop adding these per
WP:LEADLANG
unless there is a consensus to do so.
OhNo
itsJamie
Talk
15:46, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- Nothing in this section indicates that it is inappropriate to add the indigenous language name of the city, they are relevant, spoken languages, and not overly long/obstructive. Instead of citing a section and unconstructively undoing edits, provide constructive and specific feedback. There is historical consensus that Boston was Shawmut which comes from the Massachusett word Mashauwomuk.
Pinehillwetu
(
talk
) 15:50, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- Several other editors disagree with you. Again, you need consensus before making broad changes across the
ledes
of city articles.
OhNo
itsJamie
Talk
15:55, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- Is this consensus needed among editors even if edits are historically verified? There was no response to my original talk post.
Pinehillwetu
(
talk
) 16:01, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- Having a source doesn't negate
WP:LEADLANG
and
MOS:FIRST
, nor does it negate
WP:CONSENSUS
.
OhNo
itsJamie
Talk
16:07, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- It's probably best to keep it considering it's an important part of the history of Boston and gives important context to the city's history in a succinct way. It's a good faith edit that takes up minimal space and is informative for users about the longest inhabitants of Boston. I move to preserve this edit. Though standards are important to keep, this is not a meaningful deviation from the standard as some other US cities also have their indigenous names as well. These names are also helpful for beginners or folks not well versed in history understand why there are so many cities across the US and UK with the same placenames.
12.168.121.4
(
talk
) 19:06, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
[
reply
]
I'm posting this to inform interested editors that I've tagged the
Hyde Park, Boston
for NPOV concerns. See my post on at
Talk:Hyde Park, Boston
.
Jessintime
(
talk
) 15:53, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
[
reply
]
Boston ought to have a cornucopia of options for illustrating the higher education subsection. That makes it unfortunate that the current photo, an aerial photo of Harvard Business School that's too zoomed out for readers to make out much detail without expanding it, is the best we've been able to do. Would anyone like to suggest alternatives?
Sdkb
(
talk
) 19:17, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
[
reply
]
The layout of this article is awful. The lead is too long, this has a citation needed tag, and it possesses way too many single/two-sentence paragraphs. This article could also use a thorough copyedit; this would be an FAC quickfail with today's standards. Unless someone is committed to fixing this, I am going to have to submit this to
WP:FAR
.
?750h+?|?
Talk?
16:33, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- At least this article (seemingly) doesn't suffer from ownership issues like New York City did prior to several editors' interventions, so there won't be any resistance to the plan to make it a lot less crappy to read. You have my support for a FAR.
Seasider53
(
talk
) 19:49, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
[
reply
]