This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
What does this image bring to this article? MickMacNee ( talk) 16:25, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
It appears to me that the point was Mick MacNee has no interest in the article save for a picture he doesn't seem to approve of. Mstuczynski ( talk) 20:40, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
(unindent) I agree with MickMacNee (that rhymes). This photo brings nothing to this article. The bar Hogs and Heifers does not appear in the first two travel guides which appear under a Google search for Meatpacking District: [1] and [2]. Coincidentally, one of these sources is used to reference the text. The photo itself seems to center on a cash register with a light above it; the other objects in the picture seem rather tangential -- the photo is of poor substance and composition. Per this rationale I remove it forthwith and I encourage others to do the same if it is restored, citing this rationale.-- 72.76.1.199 ( talk) 22:47, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
An article that describes an area with an active night life doesn't benefit from a depiction of the night life? Picture quality aside, the photograph helps to give a sense of what is going on in the neighborhood. If reference to Hogs and Heifers is deleted from the caption the bar's notability or non-notability becomes a non-issue. To avoid an editing war I will wait for further comments, but I would suggest that the image be reinstated. Mstuczynski ( talk) 23:30, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
[
This is addressed to the anon IP user who continues to disrupt this article despite a clear concensus against his point of view. First of all, I would like to compliment you on your obvious familiarity with the policies and guidelines of Wikipedia. Have you considered opening an account? An account helps the community keep track of an editor's contributions and eases the lines of communication when there is a disagreement as to the content of a page. For instance, as your IP address keeps shifting throughout Newark, New Jersey, I am forced to leave you a note here. " Poor composition" and your failure to recognise the obvious connection between a photograph of people enjoying a nightclub atmosphere and an article that specifically mentions the importance of nightclubs to the neighborhood does not make for cogent arguement against the inclusion of this picture. The relevence is sufficient for multiple editors (with accounts and accountability mind you), to continue to restore this article to standards we all find appropriate. It is unfortunate that you have chosen this course of action. For clarity's sake, we deny that your reasoning for deletion is logical. However, if you have any reasonable way of refuting our collective arguements on this matter, that is not based on your inability to see a relevence evident to others, we look forward to your communications. Until that time, I would ask you to refrain from changing this article unless you are able to find a concensus for said change. Wikipedia is, after all, built on concensus and cooperation, not unilateral decisions. Mstuczynski ( talk) 00:48, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
There's a photo in this article which shows a cash register illuminated by a lamp, behind a bar, with some peripheral objects including a headless figure in soiled jeans atop the bar. The headless figure could be a mannequin for all we know. Of what possible value is such a photo to an article on Meatpacking District, Manhattan?-- 72.76.97.191 ( talk) 00:41, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
The lead of this article is very weird. It's not even there in the respect that it doesn't make up a propper sentence since the independent clause has no predicate. The article could also use some basic info about the size of the area. Ramblersen ( talk) 19:25, 13 April 2009 (UTC) contribs) 19:17, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
An editor has attemtped to restore the aerial view of the neighborhood to the infobox, however this image is really too detailed to be very effective at the small size imposed on it by being in an infobox, which is why I moved it elswhere in the article, where it could be displayed at a larger size. The image of a building which I replaced it with is emblematic of the activity that took place in the meatpacking district, i.e. meatpacking, because that's what it is, a meatpacking buolding, and that's what those buildings typically look like: single story buildings fronted with loading docks. Although there's a lot more that goes on in the area now that it's been gentrified, it's an appropriate image, and one which displays well at the infobox size. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 04:00, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
I am restoring the aerial view of the Meatpacking District, because the current image you use is first of all not good to look at, and you might want to take a look at these articles here Williamsburg, Brooklyn or Washington Heights, Manhattan. Gryffindor (talk) 04:02, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Regarding the Meatpacking District, I am not sure why you say that the image in the infobox is not typical of the area, because it most assuredly is quite typical of the pre-gentrified buildings there – it is, after all, a meatpacking building. In any case, if you think it's not the best picture for the infobox, fine, find another one, but do not restore the aerial view to the infobox, because at that size it's completely undistinguishable and might as well be a visual gibberish. Readers should not be required to click through to the image's page in order to see what the image is, the image should be comprehensible as it is presented in the article. Again, this discussion needs to take place on the article talk page, and not here. Please retain the status quo as I have restored it until you have a consensus. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:38, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
The article is not clear about what exactly became of the numerous slaughterhouses. Did they actually relocate? I don't imagine that 200 slaughterhouses would all close down since there was such a demand for meat back then. Perhaps this could be added to the article? ToriJana ( talk) 02:52, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
I accidentally hit save page instead of preview, thus major changes were made without an edit summary, I apologize. I put the summary in a subsequent small edit. "Respectfully submit significant additional content and research with detailed footnotes and sources." WindingRoad ( talk) 03:10, 2 April 2015 (UTC)WindingRoad
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Meatpacking District, Manhattan. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:30, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Meatpacking District, Manhattan's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "citydata":
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:41, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
I removed "By 2003, out of 250 20th-century slaughterhouses and packing plants in the area, only 35 remained." from the start of the Preservation section because its meaning was ambiguous, and the citied source didn't provide any clarification. If someone wants to re-add it, please clarify whether it is referring to slaughterhouse businesses or the buildings which had historically housed slaughterhouses. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MartyJMcFlyJr ( talk • contribs) 23:02, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
"By 1900 the area was home to 250 slaughterhouses":
Where did all those animals slaughtered there come from? Was there still so much cattle(/ pig/ poultry) farming in the direct neighbourhood? Or were big amounts of live animals transported there from farer away places (from where/ how far?) – if so, by which means (live animals on ships on the Hudson? or by train? – Were they then driven on foot, in herds, through the streets from the dock/ freight train station to the slaughterhouses? Or transported, alive, on ox/ horse drawn carriages or motor trucks?)
I realise not all of this might belong in the district article, but part of it does and part should/ might be described elsewhere and this should be connected with a link to here...
Can any of this information already be found on WP? --> Where? 2A02:3036:F:EBDB:1:1:FD7B:AC36 ( talk) 10:23, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
What does this image bring to this article? MickMacNee ( talk) 16:25, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
It appears to me that the point was Mick MacNee has no interest in the article save for a picture he doesn't seem to approve of. Mstuczynski ( talk) 20:40, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
(unindent) I agree with MickMacNee (that rhymes). This photo brings nothing to this article. The bar Hogs and Heifers does not appear in the first two travel guides which appear under a Google search for Meatpacking District: [1] and [2]. Coincidentally, one of these sources is used to reference the text. The photo itself seems to center on a cash register with a light above it; the other objects in the picture seem rather tangential -- the photo is of poor substance and composition. Per this rationale I remove it forthwith and I encourage others to do the same if it is restored, citing this rationale.-- 72.76.1.199 ( talk) 22:47, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
An article that describes an area with an active night life doesn't benefit from a depiction of the night life? Picture quality aside, the photograph helps to give a sense of what is going on in the neighborhood. If reference to Hogs and Heifers is deleted from the caption the bar's notability or non-notability becomes a non-issue. To avoid an editing war I will wait for further comments, but I would suggest that the image be reinstated. Mstuczynski ( talk) 23:30, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
[
This is addressed to the anon IP user who continues to disrupt this article despite a clear concensus against his point of view. First of all, I would like to compliment you on your obvious familiarity with the policies and guidelines of Wikipedia. Have you considered opening an account? An account helps the community keep track of an editor's contributions and eases the lines of communication when there is a disagreement as to the content of a page. For instance, as your IP address keeps shifting throughout Newark, New Jersey, I am forced to leave you a note here. " Poor composition" and your failure to recognise the obvious connection between a photograph of people enjoying a nightclub atmosphere and an article that specifically mentions the importance of nightclubs to the neighborhood does not make for cogent arguement against the inclusion of this picture. The relevence is sufficient for multiple editors (with accounts and accountability mind you), to continue to restore this article to standards we all find appropriate. It is unfortunate that you have chosen this course of action. For clarity's sake, we deny that your reasoning for deletion is logical. However, if you have any reasonable way of refuting our collective arguements on this matter, that is not based on your inability to see a relevence evident to others, we look forward to your communications. Until that time, I would ask you to refrain from changing this article unless you are able to find a concensus for said change. Wikipedia is, after all, built on concensus and cooperation, not unilateral decisions. Mstuczynski ( talk) 00:48, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
There's a photo in this article which shows a cash register illuminated by a lamp, behind a bar, with some peripheral objects including a headless figure in soiled jeans atop the bar. The headless figure could be a mannequin for all we know. Of what possible value is such a photo to an article on Meatpacking District, Manhattan?-- 72.76.97.191 ( talk) 00:41, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
The lead of this article is very weird. It's not even there in the respect that it doesn't make up a propper sentence since the independent clause has no predicate. The article could also use some basic info about the size of the area. Ramblersen ( talk) 19:25, 13 April 2009 (UTC) contribs) 19:17, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
An editor has attemtped to restore the aerial view of the neighborhood to the infobox, however this image is really too detailed to be very effective at the small size imposed on it by being in an infobox, which is why I moved it elswhere in the article, where it could be displayed at a larger size. The image of a building which I replaced it with is emblematic of the activity that took place in the meatpacking district, i.e. meatpacking, because that's what it is, a meatpacking buolding, and that's what those buildings typically look like: single story buildings fronted with loading docks. Although there's a lot more that goes on in the area now that it's been gentrified, it's an appropriate image, and one which displays well at the infobox size. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 04:00, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
I am restoring the aerial view of the Meatpacking District, because the current image you use is first of all not good to look at, and you might want to take a look at these articles here Williamsburg, Brooklyn or Washington Heights, Manhattan. Gryffindor (talk) 04:02, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Regarding the Meatpacking District, I am not sure why you say that the image in the infobox is not typical of the area, because it most assuredly is quite typical of the pre-gentrified buildings there – it is, after all, a meatpacking building. In any case, if you think it's not the best picture for the infobox, fine, find another one, but do not restore the aerial view to the infobox, because at that size it's completely undistinguishable and might as well be a visual gibberish. Readers should not be required to click through to the image's page in order to see what the image is, the image should be comprehensible as it is presented in the article. Again, this discussion needs to take place on the article talk page, and not here. Please retain the status quo as I have restored it until you have a consensus. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:38, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
The article is not clear about what exactly became of the numerous slaughterhouses. Did they actually relocate? I don't imagine that 200 slaughterhouses would all close down since there was such a demand for meat back then. Perhaps this could be added to the article? ToriJana ( talk) 02:52, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
I accidentally hit save page instead of preview, thus major changes were made without an edit summary, I apologize. I put the summary in a subsequent small edit. "Respectfully submit significant additional content and research with detailed footnotes and sources." WindingRoad ( talk) 03:10, 2 April 2015 (UTC)WindingRoad
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Meatpacking District, Manhattan. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:30, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Meatpacking District, Manhattan's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "citydata":
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:41, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
I removed "By 2003, out of 250 20th-century slaughterhouses and packing plants in the area, only 35 remained." from the start of the Preservation section because its meaning was ambiguous, and the citied source didn't provide any clarification. If someone wants to re-add it, please clarify whether it is referring to slaughterhouse businesses or the buildings which had historically housed slaughterhouses. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MartyJMcFlyJr ( talk • contribs) 23:02, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
"By 1900 the area was home to 250 slaughterhouses":
Where did all those animals slaughtered there come from? Was there still so much cattle(/ pig/ poultry) farming in the direct neighbourhood? Or were big amounts of live animals transported there from farer away places (from where/ how far?) – if so, by which means (live animals on ships on the Hudson? or by train? – Were they then driven on foot, in herds, through the streets from the dock/ freight train station to the slaughterhouses? Or transported, alive, on ox/ horse drawn carriages or motor trucks?)
I realise not all of this might belong in the district article, but part of it does and part should/ might be described elsewhere and this should be connected with a link to here...
Can any of this information already be found on WP? --> Where? 2A02:3036:F:EBDB:1:1:FD7B:AC36 ( talk) 10:23, 31 August 2022 (UTC)