Talk:Snohomish, Washington

message: Please note that leaving the  tag on the article does not semiprotect the article. To request protection or semiprotection, please visit Requests for page protection instead. JBarrett 19:59, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sprotection

message: This is now marked with a "vandalism" tag. Can someone please explain why??
Vandalism is defined by Wikipedia as "any addition, deletion, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia." Later, it says "If you are not sure that an edit is vandalism, always start with "test"."
We are told to be bold in updating pages.
So how exactly is the content of this page deliberately compromising the integrity of wikipedia. ALL of links added today look to be fair game and point to a respectable news source.
Ascheinberg 20:05, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism??

message: The article refers to the threats made to the Karch family in the wake of the cannon incident but fails to mention the support offered to the family by the Snohomish community. 71.113.20.37 04:30, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It received national attention, albeit briefly. I think it satisfies WP:N and WP:ATT. If there were more content in the article, perhaps it would be reasonable to remove it. I agree that, as written, it does not cover the support offered to the family. Walter Siegmund (talk) 17:52, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Good work on the history section. The Karch content was removed by User:SarekOfVulcan. I agree that the history section reads better now. Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 04:28, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality

message: I happen to live in the town, and if it is so desired, I know of a good vantage point from which to provide a more up-to-date picture of the town from the river. If anybody should find this a helpful addition, I will do so.
71.113.45.137 04:07, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good images with clear licenses, e.g., GFDL-self or PD-self, are always welcome. You'll need to get a username and read about uploading images. Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 05:29, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Pictures

message: Was the city incorporated in 1883 or 1890? The article contradicts itself on this point.
Blakeyrat (talk) 04:23, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Incorporation Date?

message: The May 26, 2010, Snohomish Country Tribune article states: "In 1901, the club purchased an old residence on the present site of the Carnegie and the famous Emma Patric was appointed the first librarian." and later "The formal opening was reported in the May 27, 1910, issue of the Tribune."  So what's the problem? Skyerise (talk) 19:56, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Public libarary 

message: This article can use sport, education, media, governance, and other topics added in.
Wikipedia:WikiProject_Cities/Settlements:_Article_structure 2601:601:8501:193:4416:B5F4:183C:B880 (talk) 07:49, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article structure guidelines 

message: Removing the name of the mayor and the city administrator from the lede; both are mentioned and cited in the infobox. Per WP:LEDE, the introduction to an article is a summary of the article and its most important contents. The name of the current mayor and city administrator is not a notable fact about the city and not typically cited in a WP intro. For comparison, see: Seattle, Tacoma, Spokane, Moses Lake, Bellingham, Everett, Woodinville, Monroe. Information on current city government for the articles on all of these cities (selected at random) is included in the infobox and not in the lede. Neither the mayor or city administrator are named anywhere else in the article on Snohomish, and I don't see any general notability for them that would merit their inclusion in the introduction. Irregulargalaxies (talk) 04:39, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mayor/city admin in lede