Jump to content

Talk:Nashville, Tennessee

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 74.249.202.48 (talk) at 04:41, 31 May 2009 (→‎Nicknames). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Former good articleNashville, Tennessee was one of the Geography and places good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 14, 2006Good article nomineeListed
March 8, 2008Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article

Great train wreck of Nashville

Why would you call it the "so-called" great train wreck in Nashville, Tn on July 9,1918. 101 people died . Many were soldiers returning from WWI and over have of the victims were African Americans going to work in the Dupont plant.This was very gruesome and tragic event. The newspaper says that wagon loads of body parts were taken to the morge. One witness said that the young mother sitting next to him was decapitaited and her arm was shoved "into her baby." I don't know what Wikipedia ment by the "so-called" great train wreck, but it sounds like a terrible wreck to me. The 1998 article reads "worst train wreck in US history." I am obviously offended by your statement . You should change that before a survivor or relative of someone who was killed reads it.i understand that ignorance was probaly the reason for this offensive blunder. So you are forgiven, but you need to change the statement.

You may want to edit the reference in the Nashville, Tennessee article and write a short article about the event. -- User:Docu
It sounds like you are right and the article needs to be improved. Sometimes people go overboard when striving hard to write from a neutral point of view. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 22:26, 29 Apr 2004 (UTC)
"Sometimes people go overboard when striving hard to write from a neutral point of view."
I agree with this, but i'd like to get some feedback about a specific instance. A memorial built in 1918 commemorates a massacre of women and children. One year ago the two statues that make up the monument were smashed. I wrote that they had been desecrated, but are being repaired. Someone changed desecrated to "damaged".
This "neutral" language fails to convey that the damage was human-inflicted, and obviously intentional.
My question is, how "neutral" do we want to be? --User:Richard Myers (talk)
I agree that goes a bit overboard, but have to admit that "desecrated" is a very emotive word, and has (for me at least) almost religious connotations (as in "desecrating a grave"). To convey "human-inflicted, and obviously intentional" damage, I'd probably go for "vandalised"; more neutral in the sense that it conveys the facts (assuming it has the same connotations to other readers as it does for me, of course...) - unlike "damaged" - but doesn't go further than the facts - as "desecrated" arguably does. Just an opinion, of course. - IMSoP 18:35, 2 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Pruning

This article is getting too long and awkward; it's time to prune. I don't think we need all the stuff from the Chamber of Commerce page--a link to there would suffice. An encyclopedia is not a promotional brochure, after all. And I don't think we really need the list of neighborhoods, either. RivGuySC 20:42, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I agree, the list of neighborhoods is getting unwieldy. I'll scrap it. Kaldari 18:21, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
And all that Chamber of Commerce stuff definitely doesn't belong in the intro. I'll remove that as well... Kaldari 19:03, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I'm not sure what was here before, but a brief list of the neighborhoods or areas would be very useful (I know I looked for it). I don't want to undelete something from the distant past before mentioning it, but it'd be good to at least have general geographic definitions for, e.g., 12 South, East Nashville, and the Village (if not a couple of notable commercial establishments for each). I don't think we need a promotional brochure, but it would help give a better sense of what the city is like. Cka3n 08:04, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I think the main problem with a neighborhoods list is that it quickly becomes unmanagable. Nashville has dozens of neighborhoods and districts. If we were going to have a neighborhoods list, I think it should be a separate article. Kaldari 19:26, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion (and, hence, I am discussing this here rather than changing anything in the article), the neighborhoods of the city tell more about the city than the corporations here or the bridges here, and I can't imagine a neighborhoods paragraph that would be longer than those passages. Would a decent middle position be something like: "Nashville has many distinct neighborhoods and districts, including x, y, and z" where each name linked to its own page? Of course, more style is called for, but that might be a middle ground. Cka3n 19:51, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
That sounds like a good idea to me. I think the trick is to avoid making lists. The list of businesses is problematic as well. People are constantly adding non-notable businesses or businesses not actually based in Nashville. We should probably change that to a paragraph as well one of these days. Kaldari 21:04, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Have you seen the list of neighborhoods for the article on Houston, Texas? I think we should shoot for that. —The preceding Kailyn Mlad 18:07, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Skyline images

Since there is no copyright or licensing information provided for any of the skyline images, I'm going to have to remove them from the article for now. Anyone know of any good public domain images of the Nashville skyline? Kaldari 19:53, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Since I couldn't find one, I just went ahead and shot one myself. Kaldari 02:35, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Bridges

I've added a table of notable bridges to the Transportation section. I don't think it's necessary to list every bridge in Nashville (since there are dozens), but I thought it might be useful to include the better known ones. Hunting down the lengths and opening dates has been something of a scavenger hunt. If anyone wants to help fill in the blanks, it would be much appreciated. Kaldari 02:38, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Economy

There seems to be some disagreement on what exactly Nashville's biggest industry is. Although this article originally stated that finance and insurance were the biggest, I haven't been able to find any sources to back this up. Most sources seem to suggest health care is currently the biggest:

  • "...it's the Music City's vital and growing health care industry that is steadily leading Nashville's economy... Health care's outlook as a growth industry and a financial investment continues to strengthen. This is obviously good news for our city's largest industry." - Nashville Business Journal, June 29, 2001
  • "While music is one of Nashville’s largest industries, it is generally considered the second or third most important in the area behind health care and perhaps book publishing." - EconSouth, Second Quarter 2004

I found one source (from 7 years ago) suggesting publishing was the largest industry:

  • "Even Bibles (Nashville's biggest industry) were jumping off shelves." - Slate, June 17, 1998

I also found a source suggesting that finance and insurance may not be as important to Nashville's economy as they once were:

  • "The nicknames 'Wall Street of the South' and 'Financial Center of the Southeast,' while no longer as accurate as they once were, are reflections of the influence that banking has had in contributing to the area's growth." - Insiders' Guide to Nashville, 3rd Edition

Kaldari 22:42, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

In the 1990s, Nashville went from being a "headquarters" town in finance and insurance to being a "branch office" town because of the rampant mergers and acquisitions in those industries. Examples: J.C. Bradford, First American, Commerce Union Bank, American General. Iamvered 20:38, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Notable residents

My grandmother, who lived in Nashville for many years, told me that Earl Scruggs lived down the street from her. Can anyone confirm about either Flatt or Scruggs? Shoaler 11:24, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like that's probably accurate. Scruggs apparently has a recording studio here. Kaldari 2 July 2005 01:48 (UTC)

Mike Curb

I got rid of Bjtitus's addition of record executive Mike Curb as a notable resident. If we add Mike Curb, we'll have to add every single other record executive that lives here...unless there's something extraordinarily special about him.

Zpb52 04:34, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

- There is something extraordinary and special about Mike Curb. He was a former recording artist. He owns his own label and his launched names like LeAnn Rimes and Tim McGraw. And Belmont University's school of music was named after him due to his large financial backing. He's one of Nashville's wealthiest residents and philanthropists.

It's up! Man, took me 2 hours to research and write this. I hope you all enjoy it. Feel free to expand and change anything, preferably if you have uncopyrighted pictures. Zpb52 02:01, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

Comcast

"Comcast Cable is the dominant cable service provider in Nashville. Its advertising sales arm, Comcast Spotlight, serves as the local interconnect, representing Charter Communications' approximately 150,000 subscribers in the DMA (Designated Market Area), along with two small systems in the market... In total, the interconnect has 539,000 subscribers, representing 98 percent of all cable homes in the market." [1] Kaldari 2 July 2005 01:28 (UTC)

In NASHVILLE proper, Comcast IS a monopoly, dating back to 19-whenever when Metro gave Viacom the monopoly. The Nashville article is not about Middle Tennessee...it's about Nashville. Comcast has a monopoly in Nashville. Zpb52 July 2, 2005 01:34 (UTC)
Well perhaps you're right. I was just going on the source above since I don't know much about it. Why did metro give Viacom a monopoly? Do you know what the terms of the agreement are? Kaldari 2 July 2005 01:44 (UTC)
I don't know the terms, and at the moment I'm too lazy to do any research concerning it. But I found this document from Metro Council when Intermedia sold to AT&T in 1999 [2] Maybe you can find what you need in there. Zpb52 July 2, 2005 01:49 (UTC)

pictures?

Anyone have a picture of the capitol building to put in the article?

companies in nashville

for the list of companies in nashville, I'm informed that we want to keep the list to companies having revenues of $1B or more. Question on that though -- do we want to limit this to companies based in nashville, or are companies who are influential in nashville also good for the list? If 'influential in nashville', Deloitte would have to be on the list (I'm not affiliated; in fact I dislike Deloitte as a company). Wright industries may also fit that bill, as well as Compuware -- although compuware's share around here isn't what it once was. So, base question - based here only, or are companies with a presence here ok?

My opinion is that we only list companies based in Nashville, as determining which companies are "influential" in Nashville seems too subjective. Plus I think we should try to keep the list relatively short if possible. I am, however, open to the idea of creating a new Economy of Nashville article that could deal with these things more thoroughly. What are other people's opinions? Kaldari 05:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A simple listing of companies in a city is not particularly good for a city article. A separate listing of companies might be good as a separate article/page, linked to from an economy section, or under 'see also'. Every city article should have an Economy section, however. This would describe not only the companies and types of companies based there, but also a general description of what types of workers are in the city, why there are certain types of businesses, a brief history of the economic situation, etc. Dr. Cash 21:57, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nashville-Davidson (balance)

The information you are adding to the summary of the Nashville article is not correct. Nashville-Davidson (balance) does not correspond to the old City of Nashville. Nashville-Davidson (balance) is Nashville minus seperately incorporated satellite cities. It is a designation used only by the U.S. census (so that they don't count the same people twice for two cities) and has virtually no use or value of public interest. Nashville-Davidson (balance) includes many suburbs and rural areas that were not part of the old City of Nashville. The old City of Nashville hasn't existed since the 60s and no one in Nashville (besides historians and old folks) have any idea what it corresponded to as everyone these days considers Nashville synonymous with Davidson County. Putting esoteric information about a peculiar census designation in the summary of the Nashville article isn't appropriate in my opinion, especially since it isn't accurate to begin with. Kaldari 19:54, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nashville-Davidson (balance) would have to correspond to the former City of Nashville since it says in the article of the balance "This portion generally corresponds to the area of the City of Nashville before the formation of the consolidated Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County." Heegoop, 13 January 2006 (UTC).
It says that it "generally corresponds" because most of areas unincorporated prior to consolidation were sparsely populated and thus didn't make much difference census-wise. I have corrected the article to say "roughly" rather than "generally" so that it is less misleading. I wish I could draw you a picture to explain things better, but I'm afraid the wiki-software isn't that advanced yet :) Kaldari 20:18, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully this will help it make sense:

Kaldari 20:39, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thoughts on recent deletions - Mike Curb & Nashville Superspeedway

I think a case could be made for listing Mike Curb as a notable resident, as his career has been more than just being a Music Row suit. The Mike Curb Congregation has a genuine place in the history of gospel music, and he was very successful as a composer of movie soundtracks, eventually becoming president of MGM Records. Then he served as Lieutenant Governor of California (as a Republican, under Jerry Brown!). Since moving to Nashville, he has been very active in local civic and philanthropic activities, particularly with Belmont and Fisk Universities. According to the news, he played a part in helping lure Nissan from California to Tennessee--made a promotional video speaking as an ex-Californian. I think all this makes him as good a notable local as Bettie Page, for instance. (BTW, I'm not a friend or even acquaintance of his--just interested in local history.)

With regard to Nashville Superspeedway, I think a case for a mention can be made there too. Clearly the management means to emphasize its ties to the city, or they would have chosen another name. Also, according to news reports, the property extends across the county line and lies partly in Wilson and partly in Nashville/Davidson. I believe it should be mentioned.

RivGuySC 04:03, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The speedway is located in Wilson and Rutherford counties, not Davidson. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.180.197.28 (talk) 18:16, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I believe Mike Curb is already listed as a notable resident of Nashville. Kaldari 06:36, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

History of Nashville

Thanks to Iamvered I think it's time to break out History of Nashville into its own article. Anyone object? Kaldari 00:26, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

* Done. Iamvered 20:58, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nicknames

Personally, I'm not a fan of the Nicknames section. It doesn't seem encyclopedic, it's completely unsourced, and there is no precedent for it elsewhere in Wikipedia. I don't mind if long-standing well-sourced nicknames are mentioned in the article (both "Music City" and "Athens of the South" are mentioned in most books about Nashville), but many of these other nicknames might well be ephemeral fads (just like "Powder City", "Rock City", and "The Wall Street of the South", which were all former Nashville nicknames). If we do decide to keep the Nicknames section, it should be moved to the bottom of the article, per the guidelines at WikiProject Cities. Kaldari 22:04, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the Nicknames section toward the end, just above "Sister Cities". I disagree that it's not encyclopedic-- the sections provides information that gives uninformed readers a better idea of the town's character and makeup. As far as the addition of other nicknames, as long as we can document them (I will work on sourcing the nicknames already in use), I see no reason not to include them. Incidentally, Kaldari, you rock.  :-) Iamvered 20:49, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As long as you can verify them with reputable sources, I don't see it being a problem. Kaldari 21:01, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I like the nicknames section, and you can google up some documentation on all of them, although admittedly you get more hits on Music City than Titan Town. ("Metro" is used in so many cities that I doubt it being very worthwhile.) However, I do have a question - shouldn't "NashVegas" be bicapitalized? I've always seen it that way and "Nashvegas" looks to me like it should be a trademark of the gas company. However, the google results show several examples of both. RivGuySC 18:56, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not against the nicknames section, and having lived around Nashville my entire life I've heard all of the nicknames currently up except Little Kurdistan (but apparently my father has heard of it). I really question the current justifications of "Cashville" and "Nashvegas", though. These are definitely used, but I think the origins claimed in the article are inaccurate. Cashville is just from rhyming Nashville, and I suspect most people who use it have never heard of the rap artist mentioned as "popularizing" the term. I've also heard Knoxville referred to as Knoxvegas. I think people just like slapping "vegas" on the end of cities (but of course I could be wrong). At any rate, I had never heard of the song listed and I disagree that Nashville is glitzy and that was the inspiration for the term. The first place I heard the term Nashvegas was actually from Bad Boy Breeze on the BatPoet show, which was on our local TV station (CATV) during the 90's (article: http://weeklywire.com/ww/10-18-99/nash_cover.html). Unfortunately I have no idea where to find videos of that to link to, or I'd suggest that as a source.--74.249.202.48 (talk) 04:41, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RSS feed of Nashville headlines?

The wiki-based Nashville entry at [SmallBusiness.com] includes RSS feeds of local news. I don't know what the policy is here on adding such a thing, but I gather that it's not done, as my attempt to use the code from the SB.com page did not appear to work when previewed. Here's what I had tried to put in:

(header) Recent Nashville news
Recent headlines from The Tennessean
<rss>http://tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=RSS05&mime=xml%7Cmax=4</rss> News of Nashville business and politics from subscription-based NashvillePost.com
<rss>http://www.nashvillepost.com/news/rss%7Cmax=4</rss> Local news, weather and sports from WKRN-News2
<rss>http://www.wkrn.com/taxonomy/term/20//feed%7Cmax=4</rss>

I imagine there's an ongoing discussion somewhere about the role RSS ought to play in Wikipedia, but I have not found it yet. Is there any move afoot to incorporate feeds into articles? Tom Wood 17:49, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Full disclosure, and the anti-spam conundrum

After posting various updates to this entry today (and having made contributions to a variety of entries in the past, as you can see by my history), I started to write something that would fill in the stub for NashvillePost.com, which I had added to the list of local media. Only then did I learn that I have committed spam, in the eyes of the present Wikipedia consensus. I work for NashvillePost.com. As I read the rules, that means I am absolutely forbidden to mention it or link to it on Wikipedia. Now, we are a six-year-old news service with more than 1,000 subscribers and thousands of other daily visitors, currently averaging 75,000 pageviews a month. We regularly break major stories about business and politics in Nashville -- for recent examples, do a Google News search for the word "FractionAir" or the name "Roscoe Dixon." We also have a freely available collection of past articles related to Nashville history, the majority written by one or the other of two authors whose books other Wikipedians have added to the suggested readings on the Nashville article: Bill Carey and myself, E. Thomas Wood. I added a link to that "Old Nashville" collection as well.

It can't possibly be in the best interest of readers who want to know about Nashville for me to go back in and excise the links that I have feloniously created. But if someone else out there thinks the readers would be better served without this information, I know it will disappear. In that event, I think the readers who are deprived of it might appreciate an explanation here.

Either way, I'm now sufficiently cowed to avoid writing an article that would cure the current red link for NashvillePost.com. Knowing some basic history of this media outlet and the people behind it would allow readers to make more informed decisions about what they think of its content, but nobody unaffiliated with it is in a position to tell that story. Given that any puffery I might try to include in that article would be swiftly excised, I think it would be a more satisfactory policy to allow an affiliated person to post an article on his or her own company, with full disclosure in the talk box, and then invite the world to take issue with anything in the article and to add any negative facts that may be deemed relevant. Tom Wood 18:45, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Tom, I don't have a problem with you writing an article on NashvillePost.com so long as everything in the article is properly cited and conforms to the Neutral Point of View policy. Every fact and assertion in the article must be verifible through a reputable published source, i.e. you cannot write from your own experiences and knowledge unless that knowledge is already published somewhere. Articles about commercial websites are always viewed with extreme skepticism on Wikipedia. Please read over Wikipedia:Notability (web), and make sure that your article explains why NashvillePost.com meets those criteria. Otherwise the article will likely be deleted within a week. Using inline citations will also help your chances. Kaldari 00:32, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the counsel, Kaldari. I think I can work something up that will meet those standards. I'll get to that as soon as I can. --Tom Wood 16:46, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Celsius?

How many people living in Nashville could tell you when it's around 32 C in their town? Or if they received 10 or 15 mm of rain in a day?

Well I couldn't tell you when it's 32 C, but I could tell you when we get 10mm of rain (since I work on Volkswagon Beetles in my spare time). Occassionally I'll accidently describe something in millimeters and people will look at me like I'm from another planet :) Kaldari 05:06, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Raises hand. 25 C right now. :) -- nyenyec  05:34, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nashville's Kurdish population

A few weeks ago, someone deleted the paragraph about Nashville's Kurdish population from the demographics section. The paragraph was as follows:
"An interesting note is that more Kurds call Nashville home than any other city outside of the Middle East, according to Vanderbilt University. The city has a large and active Kurdish neighborhood of more than 5,000 in the Nolensville Road area. During the Iraqi election of 2005, Nashville was one of the few international locations where Iraqi expatriates could vote. Like most American cities, Nashville has a mix of many nationalities, ethnicities, and religions."
Perhaps someone would like to find some references for this information and add it back into the article. Kaldari 02:49, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Crap, I actually remember hearing something about that (on the Daily Show of all things; Jon Stewart made a crack about Kurdish country music). I'll see if I can't dig up a real source at some point. EVula 04:22, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have completely rewritten the paragraph, with references. Kaldari 21:52, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Food

I've noticed that some city articles (Chicago for example) include a paragraph about the city's signature foods. Would something like that be appropriate for the Nashville article? What are Nashville's signature foods? Add any suggestions below (with references if you can find them):

Highest point in Nashville

The current reference for the highest point in Nashville is a book from the 40s (before Nashville was consolidated). It seems that statistic may not be accurate anymore. Does anyone know what the current highest point in Nashville-Davidson County is and how high it is? It seems there are several conflicting claims on the internet:

  • Lea's Summit in Percy Warner Park (1100 ft above sea level?)
  • Skyline Medical Center on Dickerson Road
  • Dyer Observatory near Radnor Lake
  • Love Circle
  • Tennessee State Capitol (not likely)

Kaldari 05:50, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to the USGS, the highest point in Nashville is 1,160 ft above sea level, although it doesn't say where that point is. Kaldari 20:54, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Got it. According to Nashville Music City website, that highest point is along the Highland Rim. I don't know where exactly, be it Lickton or Joelton, but it's up there somewhere. Just from having been up there I can tell you it's certainly not Skyline nor Lee's Summit. --Kailyn Mlad 18:16, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Survey on proposal to make U.S. city naming guidelines consistent with others countries

There is a survey in progress at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (settlements) to determine if there is consensus on a proposed change to the U.S. city naming conventions to be consistent with other countries, in particular Canada.

This proposal would allow for this article to be located at Nashville instead of Nashville, Tennessee, bringing articles for American cities into line with articles for cities such as Paris and Toronto.--DaveOinSF 16:54, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
However the proposal would allow U.S. cities to be inconsistent with the vast majority of other U.S. cities and towns, which (with a few exceptions) all use the "city, state" convention. -Will Beback 23:41, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nashville's suburbs

"The suburban areas however tend to vote more in line with the Republicans." What are the suburban areas? Is Hillsboro Village the suburbs? East Nashville? 12 South? None of those are urban or rural by character. What is the source for this claim, and perhaps we can find a more clear appellation?Cka3n 21:47, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the statement in question. If anyone would like to re-add it, please provide a citation. Kaldari 23:56, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MTA

I started the Nashville MTA article. Gaming Freek 01:27, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Culture Section

Sorry that I don't know how to correct this problem, but I thought I would point out that the hypertext link to "Fugitives" under the culture section goes to a general article on what a fugitive is, not to the "Fugitives (Poets)" page that seems to be implied in the article. If this isn't the place to post such a note, I apologize. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.163.7.219 (talk) 20:12, 15 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]


Civil war damage

The comment "Though the Civil War left Nashville severely damaged and in dire economic straits,..." is very out of place since not a shot was fired in Nashville during the civil war. The Battle of Nashville, fought south of Nashville near the present city of Berry Hill, was the closest the confederates got after fleeing the city in 1862 in advance of the Union's arrival. That battle was the most lopsided battle of the entire war (in favor of the Union). If anything, as the headquarters of the Union's Western campaign, the war left the city with improved defenses, infrastructure, and prominence. Bravenav 21:18, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hereby propose the merge of this article to here. Nashville, Tennessee is allegedly known unofficially as "Little Kurdistan". -- Cat chi? 18:14, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, this looks like a pretty obvious candidate for merging. I have added a sentence to the Nicknames section for "Little Kurdistan". Also feel free to add more information to the Demographics section (provided that it is verifiable). Kaldari 19:07, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have no knowledge on the issue. But if I do come across a source I will add it. -- Cat chi? 19:13, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

The population of Nashville/Davidson county

I noticed the population of Nashville was previously correct in this Wiki article. However, someone keeps editing it to an incorrect number, and I don't know why.

Per http://www.census.gov/popest/archives/2000s/vintage_2005/05s_challenges.html, the population of "Davidson County" (which is synonymous with Nashville since they are a consolidated government), is 607,413. Again, this number used to correctly be in the Wiki article.

Now, however, the Wiki article says 578,698 in the main body. The sidebar, however, still says the correct number.

Who is editing this to an incorrect # and why? I can't even find the source of the 578,698 number. It's not one of the more recent population estimates for Nashville so I don't even know where it's coming from. 64.202.137.190 14:52, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blame the Census Bureau. The truth is there is no "correct" number. The Bureau just came out with new numbers that don't reflect the corrections they issued just a few months ago (i.e. they are generated by a formula that has nothing to do with reality, so despite the fact that Nashville's population is growing continuously, according to the Bureau, it just dropped dramatically). The Census Bureau is whack, and you can tell them I said so! The only "correct" number is the 2000 number, but I can't convince anyone to use that one. Kaldari 22:49, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Basically, the census bureau uses a computer model to calculate what the estimated population should be each year. In the case of Nashville, however, the city is growing much faster than the model, so each year the census bureau's estimate gets more out of touch with reality and the city has to issue an official challenge to correct it. The 2005 estimate has been officially corrected, but the 2006 estimate hasn't been yet. So I say we stick with the 2005 estimate until the city's challenge for 2006 has been accepted. Kaldari 18:23, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposed (Printer's Alley)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

There was no consensus to merge.--B. Wolterding 17:14, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]


I propose to merge the content of Printer's Alley into here, since the notability of that article has been questioned. In fact, the article contains very little encyclopedic content, it could easily be merged here.

Please add your comments below. Proposed as part of the Notability wikiproject. --B. Wolterding 22:50, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • NO WAY! Printer's Alley is as important to Nashville as Times Square is to NY! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.107.233.248 (talkcontribs)
    • Well, that it's important to Nashville is not really an argument against merging, right? At the moment, the Nashville article doesn't even mention Printer's Alley, so if it's important, then certainly something is wrong with the current article content. --B. Wolterding 16:20, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • It's Times Square's importance to the rest of the world that warrants it having its own article, not its importance to New York. EVula // talk // // 19:38, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why not put a reference & link to Printer's Alley on the Nashville page and leave the rest alone? If wikipedia is an encycopedia to be used by people, then if someone who does not know where or what "Printer's Alley" is looks it up in wikipedia, it should come up on its own. I don't think that people only look up things they already know.
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.

Photo Update

Someone should put a new picture of Nashville in the side colomn of the main article. The other picture is quite aged by now, just for anyone's knowledge. Giancarlo1992 21:31, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nashville Neighborhoods

I am willing to create a list of neighborhoods and districts in Nashville and link it to the main Nashville page so we don't have a list going all the way down the page, I'm just stumped on which city I should use as a model. Any suggestions? Anonymous615 (talk) 23:21, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I understand what you are referring to. What list goes "all the way down the page"? With the businesses moved off page, I don't see much else that needs moving; re-edited and moved around perhaps, but not moved to a new article. Each section is fairly short as-is. Huntster (t@c) 20:19, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pending delisting

This article needs a lot of work to bring it up to WP:GA standards as described at WP:WIAGA. The WP:LEAD is subpar for a major city GA. The article is in general undercited. I will be delisting later this week if there are no objections. Otherwise, we can handle this at WP:GAR.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 03:07, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here I go.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 22:24, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Culture (music related)

it is narrow minded to only include the christian and country aspects of nashville when in reality nashville has a thriving music culture in other areas such as hip hop and rock. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Limonns (talkcontribs) 00:54, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notable Residents

This section has gotten incredibly convoluted, I'm pretty sure some of it is incorrect, and it has no inclusion criteria. Is anyone against removing everything but the link to the other article? --SmashvilleBONK! 14:07, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to do so; I'll back you up on this. I was going to propose on WikiProject Tennessee anyway that these types of boxes be killed off as trivia on sight whenever members find them, so you may want to watch that talk page if you don't already. Huntster (t@c) 15:42, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I removed it and put the link to List of notable Nashvillians under demographics. And for whatever reason, I didn't have the Wikiproject on my watchlist. --SmashvilleBONK! 19:31, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Takes Nashville!

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Takes Nashville. Who's coming? Kaldari (talk) 19:00, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nashville Template

I've been playing around with the idea of making a Nashville template and came up with this. I thought this might be added to the Nashville main page as well as to all the related articles. I wasn't sure what the best categories would be to include. I only put in 4 notable neighborhoods because those were the only ones I could find articles for. Maybe that category should just be deleted. I basically modified the Nashville landmarks template for the Culture and Landmarks group. Anyway, let me know what you think. Like or dislike the categories, the lists, the whole thing? Feel free to mess around with it. Dacoshi (talk) 02:32, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I like it! --SmashvilleBONK! 06:26, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it's been a while since I made this and if no one has any objections, I think I'll add it to the article. Go ahead and add it to other related articles as well if you want. Dacoshi (talk) 06:42, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Per capita churches highest of "any" city in America

Wikipedia has long requested a citation for the claim that Nashville has more churches per capita than any other American city.

As stated in the text on Nashville:

"The Protestant Vatican or The Buckle of the Bible Belt: Nashville has over 700 churches[26] (more than any other American city per capita)[citation needed], several seminaries, a number of Christian music companies, and is the headquarters for the publishing arms of both the Southern Baptist Convention and the United Methodist Church..."

As a Nashville native, I have heard this claim by outsiders for many years. But, no one has ever provided any proof for this obvious exaggeration. For one thing, this claim suggests that Nashville's per capita church numbers would have to exceed that of ALL other American cities. How are we defining "cities," and how many American cities are there?

Second, this exaggerated claim has been associated with the number "700" since I was a child 40 years ago. Nashville, as a city, has grown signficiantly since then (even if one excludes the rapidly expanding suburban portions of the metropolitan area). So, the claim would seem to have lost quite a lot of ground over the years, since the number of churches "per capita" would seem to be declining over time.

Finally, as a little test of my own, I examined the internet Yellow Pages listings for churches in the 30 largest American cities (based on the 2006 Census population estimates, which may even represent an undercount of Nashville's population). Mind you, this list ONLY represents the 30 LARGEST cities, not ALL American cities as claimed in this urban myth. I'm only looking at cities and not metropolitan areas, since the claim relates only to cities.

I tried culling this data from several different Internet sources, including Yellow.com, Superpages.com, and Yellowbook.com. As it turns out, Yellow.com seems to have too much redundancy and Yellowbook.com caps its listings at 500, so I focused on Superpages.com.

I realize, of course, that the listings probably still include some redundancy and may include businesses and (in some cases, houses of worship), that are not really churches. Still, when I checked the numbers against those at USAChurch.com, they were relatively similar. So, for the sake of consistency, I assumed that the redundancies were common regardless of location.

So, here are some results:

Finding #1: Among the 30 largest cities, BALTIMORE (not Nashville) has the highest per-capita number of churches, at 0.399 churches per person.

Finding #2: Nashville was ranked a wimpy NINTH (9th) out of the largest 30 cities in churches per capita, at 0.215. Now, this does NOT mean that Nashville had the ninth highest number of churches per capita of "...any other American city." NO, this only means that Nashville was 9th out of the 30 LARGEST cities. Further, Nashville is ranked only in the middle of southern cities (out of the 30 largest), at #7 out of 14. Nashville doesn't even have the highest ranking among the large cities in Tennessee: Memphis is ranked #2. If all of Davidson County's population is considered (and not just the "remainder"), then Nashville's ranking slips even further.

My suspicion is that if someone actually spent the time to rank ALL American cities on this factor (and checked the phone listings for accuracy), they'd probably find that Nashville is relatively low on the per-capita church scale by southern standards and only in the top 1/3 or 1/2 nationally. At the least, this unscientific analysis shows that the claim about Nashville having more churches "than any other American city" is certainly not proven or defensible, and it should be driven out of Wikipedia's text after misleading so many for so long.

Finding #3: In general, this analysis otherwise confirms suspicions that churches are clustered more in southern cities than in western cities or New York. Eight of the ten highest ranked cities per-capita are in the south. Eight of the ten lowest ranked cities per capita are in the west (and New York City). A possible explanation (or intervening variable) may be culture or race. Many of the highest-ranked cities also have large black populations, which may translate into larger church-going populations and/or more-but-smaller churches....

So, I know you people and Wikipedia are dying to know the overall rankings, so here they are (in order of per capita rank):

CITY                    STATE           POP06   CHURCHES PER CAP

1 Baltimore city	Maryland	631,366	2,520	0.00399
2 Memphis city	        Tennessee	670,902	2,093	0.00312
3 Fort Worth city	Texas	        653,320	1,673	0.00256
4 Detroit city	        Michigan	871,121	2,185	0.00251
5 Washington city	DC	        581,530	1,449	0.00249
6 Oklahoma City 	Oklahoma	537,734	1,308	0.00243
7 Louisville/Jeff	Kentucky	554,496	1,267	0.00228
8 Milwaukee city	Wisconsin	573,358	1,294	0.00226
9 Nashville-David	Tennessee	552,120	1,186	0.00215
10 Jacksonville 	Florida	        794,555	1,651	0.00208
11 Indianapolis         Indiana	        785,597	1,612	0.00205
12 Dallas city	        Texas	      1,232,940	2,457	0.00199
13 Columbus city	Ohio	        733,203	1,441	0.00197
14 Philadelphia 	Pennsylvania  1,448,394	2,827	0.00195
15 Denver city	        Colorado	566,974	1,091	0.00192
16 Seattle city	        Washington	582,454	1,072	0.00184
17 Las Vegas city	Nevada	        552,539	1,003	0.00182
18 Charlotte city	North Carolina	630,478	1,139	0.00181
19 Houston city	        Texas	      2,144,491	3,773	0.00176
20 Austin city	        Texas	        709,893	1,028	0.00145
21 Chicago city	        Illinois      2,833,321	3,982	0.00141
22 San Antonio 	        Texas	      1,296,682	1,817	0.00140
23 Boston city	        Massachusetts	590,763	  762	0.00129
24 San Francisco 	California	744,041	  885	0.00119
25 El Paso city	        Texas	        609,415	  555	0.00091
26 San Diego city	California    1,256,951	1,131	0.00090
27 Los Angeles 	        California    3,849,378	3,046	0.00079
28 Phoenix city	        Arizona	      1,512,986	1,151	0.00076
29 San Jose city	California	929,936	  572	0.00062
30 New York city	New York      8,214,426	1,709	0.00021

Sources: U.S. Bureau of the Census and RG144.

Questions? Comments? RBG144 (talk) 13:29, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well written and researched. I've gone ahead and removed that offending text from the article. Well done. Cleaned up table display too. Huntster (t@c) 14:18, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]