Talk:Chattanooga, Tennessee: Difference between revisions
Corrected error |
Niteowlneils (talk | contribs) →Survey - Oppose votes: People working to overturn long-standing Wikipedia standards is one of the reasons my editting has dropped from hundreds per week to hardly any. |
||
Line 83: | Line 83: | ||
====Survey - Oppose votes==== |
====Survey - Oppose votes==== |
||
#Strong oppose. New York City is probably a justifiable exception, as some consider "New York, New York" to only refer to Manhatten, while "New York City" more clearly refers to all 5 boroughs. But I would have strongly opposed the Chicago and Philly moves if I had been aware of the proposals since I believe the long-standing city naming standard should be adhered to, and DEFINATELY not violated on a case-by-case basis. Besides the many arguments others have made to conform to the existing standard, I like to be able to link to any U.S. city '''knowing''' where the article will be located. Where this is headed would require memorizing which cities do and don't follow one of the longest-serving Wikipedia standards. Since in all three cases the bare city name is/was a redirect to the 'city, state' version, moving the page doesn't change people's ability to access it without typing in the state. People working to overturn long-standing Wikipedia standards is one of the reasons my editting has dropped from hundreds per week to hardly any. [[User:Niteowlneils|Niteowlneils]] 00:34, 27 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
===Discussion=== |
===Discussion=== |
Revision as of 00:34, 27 December 2006
This template must be substituted. Replace {{Requested move ...}} with {{subst:Requested move ...}}.
School system
Doesn't the comment that the schools "are greatly underfunded" lack NPOV? emw 16:47, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- Not if you consider the fact that there are severe budget problems. If the language of the statement is what you take issue with, what would you suggest? Jaimetout 19:40, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
- I don't live in Chattanooga (anymore), so I don't have firsthand knowledge of the situation. As I read the article, that phrase just stuck out to me as an opinion, not encyclopedic in tone. Your statement that "there are severe budget problems" seems less subjective to me. Are the budget problems within the school district or with the county or state? I think it could be made more clear, but I don't know the facts well enough to do it myself.emw 15:48, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
- I definitely agree. Maybe the schools are well funded, they are just spending too much money. I do not know enough about the situation to modify but it should be modified.--Mercnboy3 15:05, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
- Since this is a talk page, I feel free to say this: Have you EVER heard of a public school system in the U.S. that is adequately funded? That said, I'd be willing to admit that Chattanooga's school budget problems are probably not any worse than those of anywhere else. Thus, this comment is superfluous and should probably be removed. Everyone agree with that? Jaimetout 21:41, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
- I'm for deleting.emw 14:19, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not sure how to work this out. Most of the debate stems from from the citys' private schools. A good fraction of the population (no cite, but I'd guess 7-13%) goes to a private school: the result is going to be a subconscious comparison since the child will probably know at least two other children in private schools. I don't think the underfunding is any different from Knoxville, but the angle is worked up because of the disparity with private schooling. T K E 06:24, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
- Since this is a talk page, I feel free to say this: Have you EVER heard of a public school system in the U.S. that is adequately funded? That said, I'd be willing to admit that Chattanooga's school budget problems are probably not any worse than those of anywhere else. Thus, this comment is superfluous and should probably be removed. Everyone agree with that? Jaimetout 21:41, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
- I definitely agree. Maybe the schools are well funded, they are just spending too much money. I do not know enough about the situation to modify but it should be modified.--Mercnboy3 15:05, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
- I don't live in Chattanooga (anymore), so I don't have firsthand knowledge of the situation. As I read the article, that phrase just stuck out to me as an opinion, not encyclopedic in tone. Your statement that "there are severe budget problems" seems less subjective to me. Are the budget problems within the school district or with the county or state? I think it could be made more clear, but I don't know the facts well enough to do it myself.emw 15:48, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
First paragraph
Someone needs to completely overhaul the initial paragraph in this article. As a Chattanooga resident, I think it's highly unrepresentative the city we Chattanoogans know and love. I hardly ever hear a train, let alone see one, and that's not why people live in and visit Chattanooga and its surrounding mountains and river. Our downtown is vibrant and fun without obliterating the scenic and environmentally-minded aspects of our city. I moved to Chattanooga for college, but the longer I live here, the more I don't want to leave. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.182.182.198 (talk • contribs)
- It would have been nice if you had left your name and possibly some concrete suggestions on how to improve the article other than just saying "it sucks and I hate it". --ZekeMacNeil 19:34, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- I'm also a Chattanoogan, and I don't have a problem at all with the article. I think it's fine and informative, and whether you like it or not, the city is well known for it's history with trains. It sounds like you'd prefer if there was a lavishly written essay on the beauty of the city.--[[User:]] 00:44, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
- Chattanooga also remains one of the largest freight rail hubs in the South. If you don't hear trains, you likely live on the eastern or northern part of the city, the rest is covered by rail. TKE 01:25, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
City Size
After the last edit in which a user changed the beginning text to state that Chattanooga is the 4th largest city in Tennessee rather than the 2nd, could someone find some supporting evidence for one or the other? Are we measuring city size by population or by area? ElfWord 00:48, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
- Population. Memphis, Nashville, and Knoxville are bigger. Mike H. That's hot 04:47, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
Skyline pic
Shouldn't the skyline pic be near the top, like other city articles? Jacksonville, Miami, New Orleans... Mike H. That's hot 06:46, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
- Could someone find a better skyline shot, that one is not representative at all. I can't even tell where that was taken from... Kerry W 15:50, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
- There was no skyline shot before, and I took it from Ruby Falls, so it isn't going to have a good focus. My motto is "Work with what you have," so I don't really appreciate the criticism. Mike H. That's hot 20:49, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
- Hey, it's better than my cellphone picture of FEMA trailers rolling through on rail that I almost uploaded! Happy editing, Teke 19:37, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
Alphabetization to conform with Wiki standards needed
Someone needs to alphabetize the Notable residents section to conform with Wiki standards. Although this article is relatively well-done, there are other Manual of Style issues with it as well.--Hokeman 16:28, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
Crime
This section's statistics need to be verified. The latest I can find is 2004 with 23 murders. The part about gangs needs a reference or it should be removed. Besides, it's doubtful Chattanooga didn't have gangs until the summer of 2003. Also I found this quote from a local news website; Mayor Bob Corker, Chattanooga: "Crime has been reduced by 26% in this community in three years...maybe even more importantly, violent crime has been reduced by over 50%." Jan. 5, 2005. http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_60621.asp Upon further review, all edits (including demographics) by 68.59.202.190 seem to be vandalism and need to be reverted. This user has a history of vandalism. --70.126.38.53 21:51, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
- Anybody else think this section is ridiculous? I have no problems with actually putting crime statistics up, but 'There are thought to be over 50 separate sets of gangs in the Chattanooga area, ranging in size from 15 members to 100 members' is ridiculous. Who thinks this? I have lived here my whole life and have never heard this. 'There has been a very high number of gang related murders in the Summer of 2006' What... two, big deal. I am deleting it right now, comparably sized cities have no crime sections. Mercnboy3 13:58, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
- There's no crime section at all now? There are plenty of cities smaller than Chattanooga that have sections on crime. The Crips article even links to Chattanooga, so one is left with the impression that gang violence is a big deal there... Thanks Dubc0724 18:19, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
- I do not see a link to Chattanooga from the crips article, must have been removed. I have lived in Chattanooga my whole life and I have never seen any signs of gangs ( besides graffiti ). The fact that we are even discussing this is ridiculous. I would walk around downtown at any time of the day with no fears. Mercnboy3 11:00, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
External Link
A few days ago I added an external link that was removed (for reasons I can understand - previous removal is not being questioned) but I would like to propose replacing it. The link is chattanooga.tennessee.com and I believe it contains useful information about Chattanooga. Yes, there are commercial links contained within - but when visiting a new location, whether as a tourist or relocating, it's important to know what hotels are in the area, what restaurants are there, etc. The site also contains a lot of highly interesting (and useful) information such as a map pointing out places of interest, some text on the town, government contacts and demographics information, as well as a yellow pages directory. At this time, also, a lot of work is being done to improve this site, to make it more informative and user friendly and I believe as a link it would be beneficial to wikipedia viewers. --Lspitz 19 Jun 2006
- Please review Wikipedia:External links. -Will Beback 19:09, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Climate
A climate section is conspicuously absent from this page. Anyone care to add it? --dm (talk) 07:12, 10 August 2006 (UTC) §§
Overall as a resident of Chattanooga, I would have to say that the tone of this article sounds more like promotional material than legitimate encyclopedic information.
Railroads: Union Station
Considering there's a blank page for Union Station (Chattanooga), do all the railroads tht go through Chattanooga(CSX, NS, ect.) use this station? ---- DanTD 10:38, 1 November 2006 (EST)
- Union Station doesn't exist anymore. It was destroyed when Ninth Street, now Martin Luther King Boulevard, was widened back in the seventies; Chattanooga hasn't had passenger service since 1970. The Krystal building stands approximately where Union Station once did, directly across the street from the Read House; its address is One Krystal Plaza because it's owner, Tommy Lupton, vehemently opposed the renaming on Ninth Street and refused to have his address be on a street named after an African-American.
Second oldest?
The second sentence reads "It is the state's second oldest major city behind Knoxville." -- but I'm not sure what this means exactly. The history section gives quite a few dates. If we're talking about the date of incorporation/charter as Chattanooga, wouldn't that be after the Trail of Tears, making both Kingsport and Memphis older. If the date is of Cherokee occupation, shouldn't the comparison be to Chickasaw occupation of Memphis (Chickasaw Bluffs), Kingsport as the Cherokee Long Island of the Holston, etc etc. If it is settlement by European-Americans, then Nashville's "French Lick" settlement dates back to 1769 (History of Nashville, Tennessee). Just wondering. Pfly 03:56, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Sports
Recent edits to the table in this section had replaced the Chattanooga Steamers, allegedly a basketball team, with the Chattanooga Steam, which seems to be a men's semi-pro basketball team. I don't know if the Chattanooga Steamers still exist. If they do, they should not have been overwritten. The Steam have a website at http://www.steamfootball.com/ which says they are affiliated with the North American Football League, but I cannot find them on that league's website. The earlier addition indicated (as does the team website) that they are part of the Southeastern American Football League, which has a website at http://www.seafl.net/, but it is not apparent that this league is active or that this team is part of it. This is making me think that semi-pro sports teams such as this one are too ephemeral to deserve Wikipedia articles. --orlady 17:14, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
- I support taking them out for the reasons given. If proof can be shown that they are a significant contribution to city life, assuming they actually do exist, then they could be included with proper sourcing. I looked up the ABL website myself; it list many proposed/failed/defunct teams from the last few years, but no Chattanooga team of any kind was listed. - BillCJ 17:27, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Requested move
Chattanooga, Tennessee → Chattanooga — The latter currently redirects to the former. Chattanooga, TN is by far the largest city with this name, and the most well-known use of the word. The Chicago, New York City, and Philadelphia pages have recently made similar moves. BillCJ 15:48, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
Survey
- Add # '''Support''' or # '''Oppose''' on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.
Survey - Support votes
Survey - Oppose votes
- Strong oppose. New York City is probably a justifiable exception, as some consider "New York, New York" to only refer to Manhatten, while "New York City" more clearly refers to all 5 boroughs. But I would have strongly opposed the Chicago and Philly moves if I had been aware of the proposals since I believe the long-standing city naming standard should be adhered to, and DEFINATELY not violated on a case-by-case basis. Besides the many arguments others have made to conform to the existing standard, I like to be able to link to any U.S. city knowing where the article will be located. Where this is headed would require memorizing which cities do and don't follow one of the longest-serving Wikipedia standards. Since in all three cases the bare city name is/was a redirect to the 'city, state' version, moving the page doesn't change people's ability to access it without typing in the state. People working to overturn long-standing Wikipedia standards is one of the reasons my editting has dropped from hundreds per week to hardly any. Niteowlneils 00:34, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Discussion
- Add any additional comments: