This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 10 |
I updated the part about TV stations WB and UPN are non existant and in their place is My Network TV and The CW but I can't find a site like the one referenced mentioned where it mentions the new stations in a list of just Minneapolis Television Stations. RandMC_
Hello, I wonder if someone who owns a television or knows better can find a source for TV stations in Minneapolis? Best I can do from Google is the FCC, but that is a search result.
[1] We also seem to need a radio station reference and one for the area of the airport . Also the caption needs a better source for Prince's studies at MDT. -
Susanlesch 22:50, 26 June 2007 (UTC). Add one -
Susanlesch
17:32, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry I missed this article's FAR, I would have loved to contribute. However, I still feel that there are some things that need to be done before this article meets standards completely.
That's it. Although, I did notice there were a few more examples of the NPOV issues in the article, but I think you get the point. Since this isn't a FAR I can take care of some of these things if no one else wants to. Okiefromokla• talk 17:59, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
I disagree. This article's lead is currently inadequate, it lacks sources, and needs to be a much fuller introduction to the city. It needs to be able to "stand alone" as its own article. (Please read WP:LEAD). This article is featured and is owned by everyone, and the Wikipedia community as a whole should be able to determine its content. Rather than reverting the edit because you didn't like it, this should be discussed. I would also like to have noted that I did discuss these issues before changing the lead, and it was agreed upon. One person does not own this article.
You know where I stand. With that being said, since you apparently did not like the previous edit, I will do the following:
Finally, as I have been saying, per WP:LEAD, readers should go into the article with a basic understanding of the article already. The lead needs to be a stand alone article in it of itself - that doesn't mean it has to be huge, but it has to be concise and comprehensive. This article's lead is too concise and does not give an accurate overview of the article. But one step at a time. Look over my proposals, but I will make the changes described in the first 2 or three bullets, pending any arguments against them. Okiefromokla• talk 01:53, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
It seems to me that if we're going to have a table showing population trends, all the data should be from the same source. If Metro Council estimates are to be used, how far back do they go?-- Appraiser 02:01, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
I am wondering about the photo that claims Minneapolitans have ancestors from five continents. Okay, obviously we can exclude Antarctica, but there are clearly descendents of people with roots on all of the six other continents. Am I missing something?
Thanks to Susanlesch for awarding me a voice recording barnstar on the occasion of Mpls reaching featured article status! I will be doing a new recording of the revised material very soon. I may also expand into a few section paragraphs but sadly I am not able to record everything because the file gets too big and the info changes too often in the lower sections. Please let me know if there is a specific request for the recording. Davumaya 19:02, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
Can we have a section on that? Nwwaew ( Talk Page) ( Contribs) ( E-mail me) (not signed in)
Well, we have an article on it.. i'm going to add the link.. Megan :) 17:44, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
So, let's see, someone thinks we ought to have a picture showing a minority demographic that carries no political messages? I think the placards in that photo are quite representative of some of the issues gay-rights activist hope to draw attention to. I believe anyone researching the issues would learn that the placards shown represent that slice of the population fairly well. We have a lot of photos in this article; I think keeping one that represents 5-10% of our population is appropriate.-- Appraiser 20:26, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
This article should be informative, not persuasive. Would you defend an image in this section of the Minneapolis Chapter of the Log Cabin Republicans?
Um...... now I realize why this image bothers me so much. The caption in the article doesn't go with the image and the picture itself is rather uninspiring or evocative of whatever message its trying to promote. Firstly, "Minnesotans have ancestors from five continents" how does that somehow connect to the GLBT Parade? It really doesn't unless gay has become a new imported culture from another continent. Perhaps it should more rightfully explain what the picture is doing, that showcasing issues in a questioning society. Secondly, not referring to the picture directly or what it is doing is misleading in an article because it's like clicking on a picture of Bill Clinton and getting Hillary at the podium with Bill sitting in the background. We know its a picture about the GLBT parade but the picture shown is communicating a starkly different message which does not tell us how it relates to Minneapolis nor the GLBT community. Sure Appraizer said it tells people to infer that Mpls is tolerant--I think there is a better way. The picture is crappy but sorry I was marching in the parade, couldn't really take other pictures of it. But even I might advocate removal of the picture for now because it just sucks in so many ways. You don't even see other people watching the parade, is this how we want to show our parade? A disfunctional-looking bunch of people dressed in black in the middle of summer downtown with no one around? Anyone have a gallery of other photos that we can choose from would be nice. .:DavuMaya:. 00:09, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
“ | Rescued from commercial development during the 1800s | ” |
I added a fact tag to the caption quoted above as uncited and possibly POV. Daisey cutter 14:30, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
According to this [3] on page 28, it did become a state park. Is that wrong?-- Appraiser 18:31, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
I think this article exemplifies what a great article should be, lots of good pics and facts. We at the Miami project have a curse. Miami is now, as of 2006, the 4th biggest metro in the U.S. We're growing at 1 million people every 10 years. Perhaps some of the people here could go talk to the Miami project people about how photos and fun facts really help an article. I'm hoping to come visit Minn some day, I imagine EVERYONE has or will visit us!
I'm working on the Boca Raton, Florida article, and trying to build it to these standards... Perhaps if you all came by and took a look, and left some comments on our talk pages. We're both dealing with world city articles, and ours seems to be suffering from the fact that getting a picture in Miami is difficult, because photographing the city, and focusing away from the tourist photos draws really bad attention. So, anyway, maybe this is a wierd thing to ask, but I just love this article so much, especially the bike rack photo! ReignMan 02:30, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi. Over time a bunch of people have added two law firms in Minneapolis. I have reverted those additions. One editor for example called them "Top 100" firms. I looked up "Top 100" for Minneapolis and found this kind of rating for many different kinds of businesses. Can anyone think of a reason that these two law firms should be here? - Susanlesch 19:39, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello. The text added yesterday about future stadiums is moved for now to cuts because it is unsourced and too long for here. Maybe someone familiar with the topic can use that to make a sourced version? - Susanlesch 03:52, 5 October 2007 (UTC) What is wrong with people? I'm pretty damn sure that Xcel Energy and the Wild are in St. Paul unless the space time continuum has been altered. Hell even the NorthStars played in Bloomington before that. Minneapolis would notice if hockey fans flooded the streets every now and then. .:DavuMaya:. 04:21, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
I've been surfing other city websites (cuz I'm thinking of applying for jobs elsewhere) and I've noticed we sort of lack a "cityscape" or skyline section and a general n'hoods section. I know we mention each subject throughout the article but where then do these two sections go if they were to be fleshed out more? The infrastructure? The demos? Baltimore (which by no means is a good article) dedicates an entirely new section called Cityscape and combines all that sort of infrastructure/housing/architecture information into itself. Combine in a current section (and its additional page) or create a new section? Thoughts? .:DavuMaya:. 15:00, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
I think the current main picture is very nice, but its getting a bit old. Who agrees that we should find a new one? 76.113.129.216 21:45, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
-Thank you for the welcome letter, but i am not new to wikipedia, ive been using it for almost 2 years now, i just never edited untill lately 76.113.129.216 02:43, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
What a shame this talk page has descended into the social sciences. I myself always liked geography, at least back in seventh grade before I realized its effect on the field of realty also known as real estate. But I would prefer to leave the photos and resulting commentary in place. If nothing more to say thank you to Margaret, Suzzy and Terre Roche. I couldn't stay long but they sounded so nice. Oh yes, and thank you to Kim Jorgenson, who I was told once watched the Uptown Theatre from across the street at McDonald's. Not much to speak of in Minneapolis at the time, but I have heard that Diana Ross was a customer in Los Angeles. We actually did better than that but no telling when a train can deliver a movie can to Bob Dylan in Prior Lake, Minnesota. Good luck. - Susanlesch ( talk) 23:12, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 10 |
I updated the part about TV stations WB and UPN are non existant and in their place is My Network TV and The CW but I can't find a site like the one referenced mentioned where it mentions the new stations in a list of just Minneapolis Television Stations. RandMC_
Hello, I wonder if someone who owns a television or knows better can find a source for TV stations in Minneapolis? Best I can do from Google is the FCC, but that is a search result.
[1] We also seem to need a radio station reference and one for the area of the airport . Also the caption needs a better source for Prince's studies at MDT. -
Susanlesch 22:50, 26 June 2007 (UTC). Add one -
Susanlesch
17:32, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry I missed this article's FAR, I would have loved to contribute. However, I still feel that there are some things that need to be done before this article meets standards completely.
That's it. Although, I did notice there were a few more examples of the NPOV issues in the article, but I think you get the point. Since this isn't a FAR I can take care of some of these things if no one else wants to. Okiefromokla• talk 17:59, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
I disagree. This article's lead is currently inadequate, it lacks sources, and needs to be a much fuller introduction to the city. It needs to be able to "stand alone" as its own article. (Please read WP:LEAD). This article is featured and is owned by everyone, and the Wikipedia community as a whole should be able to determine its content. Rather than reverting the edit because you didn't like it, this should be discussed. I would also like to have noted that I did discuss these issues before changing the lead, and it was agreed upon. One person does not own this article.
You know where I stand. With that being said, since you apparently did not like the previous edit, I will do the following:
Finally, as I have been saying, per WP:LEAD, readers should go into the article with a basic understanding of the article already. The lead needs to be a stand alone article in it of itself - that doesn't mean it has to be huge, but it has to be concise and comprehensive. This article's lead is too concise and does not give an accurate overview of the article. But one step at a time. Look over my proposals, but I will make the changes described in the first 2 or three bullets, pending any arguments against them. Okiefromokla• talk 01:53, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
It seems to me that if we're going to have a table showing population trends, all the data should be from the same source. If Metro Council estimates are to be used, how far back do they go?-- Appraiser 02:01, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
I am wondering about the photo that claims Minneapolitans have ancestors from five continents. Okay, obviously we can exclude Antarctica, but there are clearly descendents of people with roots on all of the six other continents. Am I missing something?
Thanks to Susanlesch for awarding me a voice recording barnstar on the occasion of Mpls reaching featured article status! I will be doing a new recording of the revised material very soon. I may also expand into a few section paragraphs but sadly I am not able to record everything because the file gets too big and the info changes too often in the lower sections. Please let me know if there is a specific request for the recording. Davumaya 19:02, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
Can we have a section on that? Nwwaew ( Talk Page) ( Contribs) ( E-mail me) (not signed in)
Well, we have an article on it.. i'm going to add the link.. Megan :) 17:44, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
So, let's see, someone thinks we ought to have a picture showing a minority demographic that carries no political messages? I think the placards in that photo are quite representative of some of the issues gay-rights activist hope to draw attention to. I believe anyone researching the issues would learn that the placards shown represent that slice of the population fairly well. We have a lot of photos in this article; I think keeping one that represents 5-10% of our population is appropriate.-- Appraiser 20:26, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
This article should be informative, not persuasive. Would you defend an image in this section of the Minneapolis Chapter of the Log Cabin Republicans?
Um...... now I realize why this image bothers me so much. The caption in the article doesn't go with the image and the picture itself is rather uninspiring or evocative of whatever message its trying to promote. Firstly, "Minnesotans have ancestors from five continents" how does that somehow connect to the GLBT Parade? It really doesn't unless gay has become a new imported culture from another continent. Perhaps it should more rightfully explain what the picture is doing, that showcasing issues in a questioning society. Secondly, not referring to the picture directly or what it is doing is misleading in an article because it's like clicking on a picture of Bill Clinton and getting Hillary at the podium with Bill sitting in the background. We know its a picture about the GLBT parade but the picture shown is communicating a starkly different message which does not tell us how it relates to Minneapolis nor the GLBT community. Sure Appraizer said it tells people to infer that Mpls is tolerant--I think there is a better way. The picture is crappy but sorry I was marching in the parade, couldn't really take other pictures of it. But even I might advocate removal of the picture for now because it just sucks in so many ways. You don't even see other people watching the parade, is this how we want to show our parade? A disfunctional-looking bunch of people dressed in black in the middle of summer downtown with no one around? Anyone have a gallery of other photos that we can choose from would be nice. .:DavuMaya:. 00:09, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
“ | Rescued from commercial development during the 1800s | ” |
I added a fact tag to the caption quoted above as uncited and possibly POV. Daisey cutter 14:30, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
According to this [3] on page 28, it did become a state park. Is that wrong?-- Appraiser 18:31, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
I think this article exemplifies what a great article should be, lots of good pics and facts. We at the Miami project have a curse. Miami is now, as of 2006, the 4th biggest metro in the U.S. We're growing at 1 million people every 10 years. Perhaps some of the people here could go talk to the Miami project people about how photos and fun facts really help an article. I'm hoping to come visit Minn some day, I imagine EVERYONE has or will visit us!
I'm working on the Boca Raton, Florida article, and trying to build it to these standards... Perhaps if you all came by and took a look, and left some comments on our talk pages. We're both dealing with world city articles, and ours seems to be suffering from the fact that getting a picture in Miami is difficult, because photographing the city, and focusing away from the tourist photos draws really bad attention. So, anyway, maybe this is a wierd thing to ask, but I just love this article so much, especially the bike rack photo! ReignMan 02:30, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi. Over time a bunch of people have added two law firms in Minneapolis. I have reverted those additions. One editor for example called them "Top 100" firms. I looked up "Top 100" for Minneapolis and found this kind of rating for many different kinds of businesses. Can anyone think of a reason that these two law firms should be here? - Susanlesch 19:39, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello. The text added yesterday about future stadiums is moved for now to cuts because it is unsourced and too long for here. Maybe someone familiar with the topic can use that to make a sourced version? - Susanlesch 03:52, 5 October 2007 (UTC) What is wrong with people? I'm pretty damn sure that Xcel Energy and the Wild are in St. Paul unless the space time continuum has been altered. Hell even the NorthStars played in Bloomington before that. Minneapolis would notice if hockey fans flooded the streets every now and then. .:DavuMaya:. 04:21, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
I've been surfing other city websites (cuz I'm thinking of applying for jobs elsewhere) and I've noticed we sort of lack a "cityscape" or skyline section and a general n'hoods section. I know we mention each subject throughout the article but where then do these two sections go if they were to be fleshed out more? The infrastructure? The demos? Baltimore (which by no means is a good article) dedicates an entirely new section called Cityscape and combines all that sort of infrastructure/housing/architecture information into itself. Combine in a current section (and its additional page) or create a new section? Thoughts? .:DavuMaya:. 15:00, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
I think the current main picture is very nice, but its getting a bit old. Who agrees that we should find a new one? 76.113.129.216 21:45, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
-Thank you for the welcome letter, but i am not new to wikipedia, ive been using it for almost 2 years now, i just never edited untill lately 76.113.129.216 02:43, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
What a shame this talk page has descended into the social sciences. I myself always liked geography, at least back in seventh grade before I realized its effect on the field of realty also known as real estate. But I would prefer to leave the photos and resulting commentary in place. If nothing more to say thank you to Margaret, Suzzy and Terre Roche. I couldn't stay long but they sounded so nice. Oh yes, and thank you to Kim Jorgenson, who I was told once watched the Uptown Theatre from across the street at McDonald's. Not much to speak of in Minneapolis at the time, but I have heard that Diana Ross was a customer in Los Angeles. We actually did better than that but no telling when a train can deliver a movie can to Bob Dylan in Prior Lake, Minnesota. Good luck. - Susanlesch ( talk) 23:12, 25 December 2007 (UTC)