Talk:Warren, Michigan

Warren is Detroit's largest suburb within the country, yes, but I would argue that Windsor, Ontario is really Detroit's largest suburb. Not sure how best to rephrase the sentence.

Windsor a suburb?

Most people from Windsor do not consider themselves to be a 'suburb' of Detroit. They are a separate grographic and demographic area.

Windsor a City in Its Own Right

Windsor is a city that, although all-but contiguous to Detroit, is a city in its own right with its own suburbs. El cid1010 (talk) 22:27, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Although the word "contiguous" here hardly fits. Windsor, Ontario is in a different country from Detroit, Michigan. One has to cross the border (and now you have to have a passport to do it). The Detroit River is a mile wide, divides the two cities, and you can either take the Ambassador Bridge (which has so much truck traffic on it that it is frequently very slow) or the Detroit–Windsor Tunnel. This is not to mention that the 'feel' of Windsor and Detroit are enormously different. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 22:31, 15 April 2008 (UTC) Stan

Gangs in Warren

I note the following edit is in this article:

Gangs

Gangs have been started in South warren since inner city kids have been movin to the suburbs. Gangs:

• Cash Flow Posse
• South Warren Crips
• South Warren Bloods
• Jaycee Park Latin Kings

Besides the grammatical issues ("warren" and "movin"} there is the valid question of notability, and the reliability of the myspace.com reference. What demographic are we trying to please here? Is this a gang posting? There are a number of important questions for Wikipedia, its administrators, and its contributors to contemplate. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 21:38, 14 April 2008 (UTC) Stan

I agree, it needs to be removed. It's defamatory and unsourced, at most it's advertising for a particular "gang". Even if a reliable source is found, it should be included in a "crime" section with no need to name specific gangs. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 21:46, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Image sizes

Re: File:Warrencenter.JPG ... using fixed image sizes works great - if everyone has the same screen resolution and moniotor sizes. In reality; different people have different hardware ... resulting in what's "too small" for one user, appearing to take up a large chuck of screen space for another. That is why the "my preferences" settings exist, so that each user can have an image size that works ideally for their hardware. Forcing an image size bypasses those custom settings, forcing an image size regardless of the hardware that the user has. WP:MOS states that "As a rule, images should not be set to another size (that is, one that overrides the default)." Variation from the default should generally onl;y be used for a select set of scenarios:

• Images with aspect ratios that are extreme or that otherwise distort or obscure the image
• Detailed maps, diagrams, or charts
• Images containing a lot of detail, if the detail is important to the article
• Images in which a small region is relevant, but cropping to that region would reduce the coherence of the image
• Lead images, which should usually be no larger than 300 pixels

However, none of those scenarios apply to this image. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:36, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

There is a lot of detail to this image. Is the detail important to the article? I suppose that's subjective. The default size makes the image small and the details hard to see, so it almost becomes useless. While image size might not matter for something like this: [1] this particular image is one of a street scene, and at default size the scene just isn't visible clearly. That seems important, doesn't it?Makedonski (talk) 03:44, 2 June 2009 (UTC)