Talk:Minneapolis

To do

Things that need doing. We've lost time to a sockpuppet farm but we've gained an expert copyediting pass, for which I am grateful.

• A featured article review is tentatively scheduled for January 2023. After 15 years, a bunch of things will need to be fixed. -SusanLesch (talk) 16:32, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

• In Minneapolis#Waterpower;_lumber_and_flour_milling. Minneapolis led the world in flour milling for 50 years.Y
• tunnel collapse at St. Anthony Falls in 1869 Y
• In Minneapolis#Demographics. A 2015 report found racial and ethnic minorities in the city were unequal in education, with 15 percent of Blacks and 13 percent of Hispanics holding bachelor's degrees compared with 42 percent of the White population. While the standard of living is rising with incomes among the highest in the Midwest, in 2015, the median household income among minorities was below that of Whites by over $17,000 and the poverty-rate gap between Blacks and Whites was the widest in the US. Y
• The section Minneapolis#Annual_events needs sources.
• Replace source: Encyclopedia Britannica, used in the Religion and Economy sections. Y
• Replace Dakota dictionary. Y
• Restore 2020 census to Demographics, following lead from User:Svenskbygderna.
• Source and rewrite old sentence from Minneapolis#Social_tensions: "Minneapolis contended with White supremacy, participated in desegregation and engaged with the civil rights movement; in 1968, the American Indian Movement was founded in Minneapolis."

References

-SusanLesch (talk) 13:48, 26 June 2022 (UTC) restored SusanLesch (talk) 23:36, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Images need the alt attribute

The0Quester, thank you for the new collage. Would you please add alt text for your images? Accessibility is our first obligation, and alt descriptions are required of featured articles. Thank you. -SusanLesch (talk) 15:09, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

P.S. Sorry, I can't find that is true that alt text is a requirement. Just from experience, I believe that GA's don't require it. Strange! PPS. Wikipedia had an RfC on this and this requirement failed. Stunning. Still, alt is encouraged. -SusanLesch (talk) 20:25, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Neighborhoods

User:Magnolia677 wrote in their edit summary, "a non-notable event not mentioned in the article". MOS:IMAGES has no requirement that the subject of images be covered in the article. In fact, per MOS:CAPCONTEXT, a provision exists in Wikipedia guidelines, "to get more context if you do not cover that in the article." This long-standing image was restored because it draws readers to the Neighborhoods section. -SusanLesch (talk) 15:23, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Spring art party, North Commons Park, Willard-Hay, one of the 83 neighborhoods of Minneapolis

I have included the photo and caption, which SusanLesch uploaded from Flickr 15 years ago. WP:IMGCONTENT says: "The purpose of an image is to increase readers' understanding of the article's subject matter, usually by directly depicting people, things, activities, and concepts described in the article."

• "Spring art party" is not mentioned in the article.
• "North Commons Park" is not mentioned in the article.
• "Willard-Hay" is not mentioned in the article.

There is also no formal event called a "spring art party" in this park or in this neighborhood. All that is depicted is two women doing something with fire, and absolutely nothing depicting anything described in the article. SusanLesch's upload is decorative and adds no value to the article. Magnolia677 (talk) 16:33, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

2020 mural organized by the Minnesota African American Heritage Museum and Gallery

• That's not quite accurate. "Not mentioned in the article" is the point. No matter how many times you repeat, repeat, repeat, Wikipedia guidelines do not require it. This caption leads directly to Wikipedia's strong list of 83 neighborhoods.
• Perhaps you would find and upload an alternative from the near-north Minneapolis community. We don't, for example, have a photo of the new Minnesota African American Heritage Museum and Gallery, or the Phyllis Wheatley Community Center. You might have to write an underlying article. If you will provide one, then I can support swapping this photo out. -SusanLesch (talk) 19:08, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

I found one, if you'd write the article. -SusanLesch (talk) 19:36, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

@SusanLesch: Your photo is decorative and fails WP:IMGCONTENT. Please remove it so we can improve the article. Thank you for your understanding. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:52, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

I don't think wikilawyering should displace a charming photo made by a UK visitor, illustrating a day at the neighborhood park. Removing it would weaken the Neighborhood section and not improve the article, so I asked an expert on Minneapolis neighborhoods. Will wait to hear back. -SusanLesch (talk) 23:32, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

It's curious that what you say fails actually fulfills WP:IMGCONTENT: The purpose of an image is to increase readers' understanding of the article's subject matter, usually by directly depicting people, things, activities, and concepts described in the article. This image depicts people, activities and concepts occurring in a Minneapolis neighborhood, and elegantly at that.

How about these, from your recommendations to WikiProject Minnesota?

• 
  Powderhorn
• 
  Phillips West

-SusanLesch (talk) 15:00, 30 November 2022 (UTC) (edited)

@SusanLesch: How could anyone respond to such a disrespectful tone. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:54, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

@Magnolia677: That should be better. If you won't give us an alternate photo, your reply would help. -SusanLesch (talk) 19:52, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

This photo of Willard-Hay actually shows the neighborhood

I hate that one and feel that it is completely useless. The Powderhorn one is good. Sectionworker (talk) 21:25, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

What's to hate about Willard-Hay? The Capri Theater is there, and the splashpad and playground at Willard Park. Kids play there you know. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:17, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

It was uploaded by Magnolia677, which shows to go ya how wrong I can be. Apologies, User:Magnolia677, your taking offense was completely understandable. On the other hand, it's a remarkably poor photo that could have been taken in any one of the world's 10,000 cities. -SusanLesch (talk) 22:29, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

The image is 7,372 × 3,686 pixels, which makes it a remarkably high-quality image by Wikipedia standards, and there likely is no corner of North Penn and Golden Valley in any other US city. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:35, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

So what? Professional Photographers of America agrees that technique and technical excellence are important! But they are only 2 of 12 judging criteria. Apartment buildings tell us zip and could be mistaken for any city in the world. I tend to agree with Sectionworker that Powderhorn is the best, and it's by the same photographer. It is only 5,467 × 4,100 but it has heart and soul and the sign is legible. -SusanLesch (talk) 00:03, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

So what is exactly right. Photographs are judged by a lot more than who has the best camera. A bunch of streets with buildings do not represent "neighborhoods". People being neighborly, as in the Powderhorn photo, are a much better choice. Sectionworker (talk) 02:06, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

I see that SusanLesch discovered the Flick photographer Fibonacci Blue. That same photographer uploaded over 1000 photos of Minneapolis neighborhoods. Why don't we all have a look-see and find some highly relevant neighborhood photos. This one looks good. Magnolia677 (talk) 11:32, 1 December 2022 (UTC).

I'll play for one morning while waiting for a reply from our neighborhood expert. Kindly keep in mind the focus of "directly depicting people, things, activities, and concepts." -SusanLesch (talk) 15:03, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not accept original research, so unless your "expert" is a reliable source like a book or a journal, their opinion means little. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:27, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Geez, their opinion matters as much as yours does. Most of these photos and more are already in the Commons. Somebody has been doing a lot of work. Thank you doesn't quite say it, but thank you. -SusanLesch (talk) 16:19, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Extended content
1. Powderhorn 2. Cedar-Isles-Dean 3. Regina 4. Downtown East 5. Powderhorn 6. Powderhorn 7. Seward 8. Columbia Park 9. Central 10. Cedar-Riverside 11. East Phillips 12. East Phillips 13. East Phillips 14. Holland 15. Uptown 16. Lowry Hill East 17. Stevens Square-Loring Heights 18. Cedar-Riverside 19. Bancroft 20. collage

There's my hour's work. I still like the first Powderhorn. -SusanLesch (talk) 16:30, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

The new Powderhorn prominently displays a liquor store sign with native dancers below it. I can not support that. Sectionworker (talk) 20:37, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Why is that, Sectionworker? I wonder if you saw the file description for #14. Holland. "Only in America: our local Islamic Cultural Center shares a parking lot with a liquor store." I would love to see your choices from Wikimedia Commons. Anyway my vote so far is for the first Powderhorn, the Sidewalk Talk. P.S. The only reason I added the first Phillips West is that I'm 99% sure that in the mid-distance is former interim police chief Amelia Huffman (non-notable as Magnolia would have it). -SusanLesch (talk) 14:56, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

The first Powderhorn is my favorite as well. What do you think of this one?

Sky and Prairie-Powderhorn-Minneapolis-2006-05-07

Sectionworker (talk) 17:47, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Absolutely! We had that one during FA review. I was worried because their Wikipedia page says in 2019 they ran out of money, but I guess their website indicates they made it. Anyway yes, it shows some of the physical neighborhood along with the performance. All things considered I think the photo we have now ticks most of the boxes but I can support an improvement. -SusanLesch (talk) 18:27, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Obama was still in his first term when that photo was taken. I oppose its inclusion, and want something more recent. Magnolia677 (talk) 21:12, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

The only possibly valuable photo in our article was made by John Vachon before Obama's mother was born. Recent doesn't correspond to good. Here are our five candidates. I'm still hoping to hear from WikiProject Minnesota. Feel free to edit. -SusanLesch (talk) 23:25, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Spring art party, North Commons Park, Willard-Hay, one of the 83 neighborhoods of Minneapolis

Sidewalk talk in Powderhorn Park, one of the 83 neighborhoods of Minneapolis

Cyclists on Midtown Greenway in Phillips West, one of the 83 neighborhoods of Minneapolis

[[

Cyclists on Midtown Greenway in Midtown Phillips, one of the 83 neighborhoods of Minneapolis

Columbia Park, one of the 83 neighborhoods of Minneapolis

This second photo of Midtown Greenway was taken in Midtown Phillips, Minneapolis. I have added coordinates to the image file. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:50, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

This image of Columbia Park shows the industrial side of Minneapolis. Some readers may find it refreshing. Otherwise, the cyclists on Midtown Greenway has my vote; it shows the recreational side of the city, and isn't a creepy closeup of someone. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:05, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Definitely the Midtown Greenway photo for me. Sectionworker (talk) 23:04, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Thirded the Greenway photo; it captures people (both bikers and walkers) in a park built onto historic infrastructure! Great work all! —⁠Collin^{t c} 23:51, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Fourthed. @Magnolia677: Do you want to do the honors? Thank you again for figuring out the location. -SusanLesch (talk) 15:23, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

@SusanLesch: It gave me a reason to grab lunch at Maria's Restaurante on Lake Street while I figured it out. I'd be happy to add the photo. Were we going to swap it for the women-with-fire picture? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:32, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, the women are retired. Best wishes. -SusanLesch (talk) 16:03, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Nearly unanimous No. Closed to save editor effort per WP:SNOW. -SusanLesch (talk) 14:42, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

---

Heading text

RfC: photo in the Cuisine section

Should this photo of the Owamni restaurant replace this photo of the 5-8 Club in the Minneapolis Cuisine section? -SusanLesch (talk) 00:11, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Should Owamni replace...

the 5-8 Club?

• Yes. For two good reasons:

1. Owamni won James Beard Best New Restaurant in 2022.
2. Wikipedia cannot decide a winner in the dispute between the 5-8 Club and Matt's Bar over who invented the Jucy Lucy, by picturing one and not the other. Picturing both is undue weight for cheeseburgers. The current photo violates Wikipedia core policy at WP:NPOV. -SusanLesch (talk) 00:11, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@SusanLesch: How does the photo violate WP:NPOV? Magnolia677 (talk) 21:33, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

You unfairly picked your favorite to picture. Please stop arguing the same point over and over.

• "There’s a war going on in south Minneapolis between two rivals... For half a century, these two bars on Cedar Avenue South have claimed to make the original, and best, Juicy Lucy."

References

• No Per Wikipedia:Recentism. The Banner talk 16:32, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
  • Alternative option: replace the photo of the restaurant by a photo of the Jucy Lucy. The Banner talk 16:37, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, User:The Banner. Owamni chef Sean Sherman also won James Beard awards in 2018 and 2019—we cannot call that recentism. -SusanLesch (talk) 17:28, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

With the other restaurant having a history going back to 1928, focusing on rather recent awards for a 2-year old restaurant is RECENTISM. The Banner talk 17:59, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

COME VISIT MINNEAPOLIS! Eat at James Beard award-winning Minneapolis chef Gavin Kaysen's Spoon and Stable built in 1906, plus if I'm not mistaken his Demi restaurant building was built in 1918. Here's your invitation. 😃 -SusanLesch (talk) 18:36, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Pardon me, @The Banner: Owamni is built on the ruins of the Standard Mill built in 1878, also site of Fuji Ya, Minnesota's first Japanese restaurant. -SusanLesch (talk) 19:19, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

The building is much older, the establishment not. I put a question mark at the notability anyway. The Banner talk 20:48, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

I understand a little from reading your user page, so I won't press you. But the restaurant's notability is otherwise unquestioned: BBC, PBS Newshour, Le Monde, The New York Times, La Liste, New Yorker, NBC News and countless local sources. The time has come for indigenous chefs to be heard. -SusanLesch (talk) 17:59, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

If you look at the actual article, you see 2 sources saying the restaurant has opened and 3 sources that it has won an award. The article does not prove its notability. The Banner talk 19:20, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

But we digress, I have already answered this RFC and my opinion has not changed. The Banner talk 20:33, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Quite all right. I'd invite you again, to write the Owamni article, but you've made your exit. Best wishes. -SusanLesch (talk) 23:27, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

• No - The photo of the 5-8 Club is both significant and relevant, per MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE. The article mentions the history of the 5-8 Club, and its connection to the mouthwatering Jucy Lucy burger. The photo itself is interesting too, and meets some criteria of MOS:IMAGEQUALITY. Regarding the photo of Owamni restaurant, all it shows is people eating on the second floor of a building that says "water" on the front, and nowhere at MOS:IMAGES does it suggest gimmicky "award-winning" restaurants get priority. Magnolia677 (talk) 21:51, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

• No or Neither - the best solution for these types of arguments is either "include both" or "remove both". • Sbmeirow • Talk • 04:43, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

• No - The photo of people sitting at tables on the second floor of a dark building does not make for a good illustrative aid. The 5-8 Club is at least readily recognizable as a restaurant to the average reader, so if there is going to be a photo of a restaurant, it should be the 5-8 instead of Owamni. --Sable232 (talk) 20:23, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Where was decided to just remove the picture? The RFC was about replacing. The Banner talk 10:39, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

@The Banner: Agreed. I have restored the photo. Magnolia677 (talk) 11:19, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Jucy Lucy

A Jucy Lucy hamburger, invented in Minneapolis

@Magnolia677: Can you make a good caption and change our photo to this one? I think you liked it before, and one half of our RfC respondents were in favor of "no or neither" dive bar or an "alternative". Thank you. -SusanLesch (talk) 16:37, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

A photo of half-eaten food is not an improvement over the photo currently in the article. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:14, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

I know you liked the multiple image template. @Magnolia677: I imagine you could write a better caption. -SusanLesch (talk) 20:08, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Two restaurants, the 5-8 Club and Matt's Bar, claim to have invented the Jucy Lucy burger

What different does it make what I like. I don't own this article. Magnolia677 (talk) 21:23, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Just deferring to your opinion and hoping for a collaboration. Never mind. Also a correction. This article says Owamni (Fuji Ya) is built on the Columbia Mill. -SusanLesch (talk) 00:08, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

If you want to replace it by a Jucy Lucy, I suggest to replace it by one of these pictures. It gives a far better view of the JL. The Banner talk 11:27, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Jucy Lucy burger

I wanted to add support for an image of the Ju[i]cy Lucy; there are plenty of building images already in the article and I'd argue that the JL image is both nice variation and illustrative of a food item that some readers may be unfamiliar with. —⁠Collin^{t c} 16:53, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

And actual food in an section about food is not a bad idea. But with SusanLesch throwing in a RFC for a photo change, we have no other option than tiptoeing around this theme again. Maybe there is more typical Minneapolis food out there. The Banner talk 19:16, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

What is the problem, User:The Banner? In the RfC, 1) you suggested an alternate, 2) I explained this photo violates WP:NPOV, and 3) User:Sbmeirow suggested we "include both" or "remove both". That adds up to 3 of 5 respondents. Then Collin added his opinion in favor of the cheeseburger. -SusanLesch (talk) 19:32, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

You came with an RFC to force a photo change. That was shot down. End of story. No photo change. The Banner talk 19:59, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Unless you come with another RFC of course but now there are 3 options: 1) do nothing (per your RFC); 2) place the photos of both "inventing" restaurants and 3) replace the photo by one of the burger. And if option 3: another RFC to choose between the three suggested burgers. By and large: you made it difficult, now deal with that. The Banner talk 20:04, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

I closed the RfC with WP:SNOW, "a polite request not to waste everyone's time." -SusanLesch (talk) 20:36, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

@SusanLesch: How does a photo of a restaurant—with a caption "it claims to be one of the creators of the Jucy Lucy cheeseburger"—violate WP:NPOV? Magnolia677 (talk) 22:05, 19 December 2022 (UTC)