Talk:Las Vegas

Template:V0.5

New City Manager.

The New City Manager of Las Vegas is Betsy Fretwell, who replaced Douglas Selby when he retired. Can someone change the city manager? 71.205.0.204 (talk) 14:50, 19 June 2009 (UTC) http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2009/mar/06/betsy-fretwell/

Misleading hatnote

The current hatnote for this article advises readers seeking information about the Las Vegas Strip to go to the Paradise, Nevada article. This is misleading, as that article has less than one paragraph about the Strip in its lead; this article is actually a better resource for the Strip than that. What the hatnote should say is "for the Las Vegas Strip, see the Las Vegas Strip article", but I'm not sure what the best way to word that is. Cheers, Rai•me 16:16, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Fixed with:

{{otheruses4|the city of Las Vegas only|the Las Vegas Strip|Las Vegas Strip|Las Vegas Valley|Las Vegas metropolitan area}}

{{otheruses4|the city of Las Vegas only|the Las Vegas Strip|Las Vegas Strip|Las Vegas Valley|Las Vegas metropolitan area|other uses|Las Vegas}}

 _{Guy M | Talk}  20:06, 20 July 2009 (UTC) (UPDATED:  _{Guy M | Talk}  20:18, 20 July 2009 (UTC))

Thanks, that is much better. But is there a less awkward way to direct readers to the Las Vegas Strip articles besides saying, "for the Las Vegas Strip, see Las Vegas Strip"? Your edit is a significant improvement, but perhaps just {{seealso}} would suffice? That is what was in place before. Cheers, Rai•me 20:30, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

How about a {{this}} and a {{that}} (just kidding!), I mean a {{see also}}?

{{This|'''city of Las Vegas only'''|Las Vegas}}

{{See also|Las Vegas Strip|Las Vegas metropolitan area}}

This article is about city of Las Vegas only. For other uses, see Las Vegas.

See also: Las Vegas Strip and Las Vegas metropolitan area

 _{Guy M | Talk}  21:15, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

...or maybe {{Distinguish}}

 _{Guy M | Talk}  21:21, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Good idea - how about:

• {{This|city of Las Vegas only|Las Vegas}}
• {{tl|Distinguish|Las Vegas Strip|Las Vegas metropolitan area}}

Or, to keep it succint and all on one line, we could just use:

• {{dablink|This article is about the city of the Las Vegas only, not to be confused with the [[Las Vegas Strip]] or the [[Las Vegas metropolitan area]].}}

I personally like the {{that}}, but... ;-) Cheers, Rai•me 21:28, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I'd go for

{{This|city of Las Vegas only|Las Vegas}}

{{dablink|This article is about the city of the Las Vegas only, not to be confused with the [[Las Vegas Strip]] or the [[Las Vegas metropolitan area]].}}

 _{Guy M | Talk}  21:38, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't think we should state "This article about the city of Las Vegas only" twice. And, seeing as Las Vegas is already the dab page, I don't really think we need a hatnote from a qualified, disambiguated page back to the dab page itself. But, if the link does remain, the first hatnote should probably read: {{This|city in Nevada|Las Vegas}} Cheers, Rai•me 03:48, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Archives

We had several archives, 1, 2, 01 and 02 over time. I consolidated them into one archive which should make it easier to find things in the archive. Vegaswikian (talk) 07:20, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

greetings

Sup —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.20.61.191 (talk) 00:49, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Scope: Is This Article About Just the City?

According to the notices at the top of this article: "This article is about the city of Las Vegas, Nevada proper, not to be confused with the Las Vegas Strip or the Las Vegas metropolitan area." and "This article is about the city in Nevada. For other uses, see Las Vegas."

I agree, but the article itself doesn't follow these requirements. Many statements, especially those in sections Economy and Redevelopment, refer to the Strip or to the metropolitan area. Since there's already an article on the Las Vegas metropolitan area, it seems we should either combine the two articles, or separate the two. Right now, there's a hodge podge. Opinions? Larry (talk) 14:54, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Since the Strip developments have a tendency to drive, in a good or bad way, the economy in the city, it is not unreasonable to include them here. Having said that, rewriting those areas of the article to move most of the material to the metro article would seem to make the most sense. Vegaswikian (talk) 17:46, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

pronunciation

Definitely /lɒs/ rather than /lɑːs/? Is this how non ɒ/ɑː merging accents pronounce it? In Britain, people usually say /læs/, so I can't tell from that point of view. Lfh (talk) 17:12, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry I never took the time to figure out those codes. The ending is like the end portion of 'loss', the beginning like 'la'. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:49, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I was wondering if the beginning was like "loss" or "la", but those vowels are identical in most American accents anyway. I would think "la" seems more likely though. Lfh (talk) 13:16, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

As someone who lived in Las Vegas for over 11 years, most people I have talked to have said /lɑːs/, and Spanish speakers do as well. MohammadMosaddeq 00:38, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Picture 2010

The photo in question. This prior photo shows only a small amount of the city of Las Vegas. While I fully understand that the Las Vegas Strip is not located in the city of Las Vegas, this is being explained explicitly under the new picture and throughout the article. The prior picture shows downtown only, and the city of Las Vegas, not including the metro, Paradise, NV, or Winchester, NV, still expands beyond this point. Please find a new picture of the entire city, rather than just a portion. It would be better suited to the artilce. In the mean time, I will leave this picture, but the sooner the better. I want to work with you guys as a team to find a picture that is better suited. Much appreciated. Thank you! 28 March 2010 Bporter28 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bporter28 (talk • contribs) 22:03, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

The city does not include anything south of Sahara. So while the current image may only show a portion of the city, it shows the notable portion. Using a picture that is mostly areas that are not in the city is just not appropriate for the article on the city. Maybe it is of value in any of the articles that cover the area in that image. It would be nice if there were a selection of images available that could be used, but for whatever reason, they seem to be hard to come by. In any case, getting a picture of the entire city would be difficult at best since it stretches from the valley in the east to the foothills in the west. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:46, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

It's a tricky one, but as noted at the top of the article, "This article is about the city of Las Vegas, Nevada proper, not to be confused with the Las Vegas Strip or the Las Vegas metropolitan area." Thus, an image of The Strip, or of such metropolitan areas as Paradise, belong elsewhere. Larry (talk) 01:07, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

The notable portion of the city is in fact the Strip. While it is not located in the city limits, it is the main reason people come to Las Vegas in the first place. The photo I have chosen shows not mostly areas that are not in the city, but the city as a whole up to Sahara and beyond. I have also checked other city pages on Wikipedia, and many top images on those pages feature montages or monuments that are in fact outside the actual city limits in suburbs, etc. Please see if you can find a better picture though because this one is really not of the best quality and does not show much, if anything that Las Vegas itself is famous for. 29 March 2010 Bporter28 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bporter28 (talk • contribs) 05:56, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

THE STRIP IS NOT IN THE CITY!!!!!! It is in the area that most people call Las Vegas. So trying to highlight the strip in the city article is simply wrong. I'm going to undo your last change of the image since the two are about the same and you replaced the more detailed one (1280x960} with the less detailed one (600x402). Vegaswikian (talk) 18:23, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

And just who are you? COnsidering you did not sign, I'm going to assume that you are a vandal and disregard your rude comments. THe Strip is the main reason Las Vegas is famous and is the main reason that people come to Las Vegas. Even though it IS NOT in the city, many other top images on wikipedia feature monuments that are not within city limits. This applies for many other wiki articles, such as Dubai, Washington, D.C., etc. So, why cant the Las Vegas page show something that the city is famous for? I would also appreciate if just me and Vegaswikian work this out. He is much more professional and is nice to work with. Thank you. 29 March 2010 Bporter28 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bporter28 (talk • contribs) 04:50, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Nevermind, I see now that you are Vegaswikian. I have tried to work professionally with you, but obviously that has not worked for you. You are being extremely anal about this matter and I am simply trying to find a better picture for the city. The one that you keep posting does no justice to the article. The one I found recently shows more. Please discuss. Thanks. 29 March 2010 Bporter28 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bporter28 (talk • contribs) 04:59, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

The two pictures are pretty much the same except one is poorer quality. Vegaswikian (talk) 05:19, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Precisely, which is why I have chosen one on a clearer day with a wider range in the background. I would also like to call attention to the other picture which shows more of the valley and what the city is famous for. 30 March 2010 Bporter28

The picture restored by Vegaswikian is a better representation of the CITY of Las Vegas. Other areas are NOT part of the city, and are thus not appropriate for this particular article. Larry (talk) 17:27, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Indeed. Las Vegas, Nevada is about the city Las Vegas, Nevada -- not about Paradise, Winchester, Spring Valley, Henderson, or any of the rest of Clark County. Can this be any more clear? --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 18:09, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Indeed it is very clear. But other Wikipedia city pages show top images with things the city is famous for. This is despite the fact that many of these images contain monuments that are not in the city. It was also made QUITE clear in the image caption what the picture showed and what its purpose was. 30 March 2010 Bporter28 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bporter28 (talk • contribs) 21:15, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

And if you can get consensus to add to the confusion about what the City of Las Vegas is (as opposed to the Las Vegas Metropolitan Area), then that picture could be used. As it is, the consensus at this article appears to be that it should be about the city, and that the photo should be as well. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 22:39, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

The picture would be reflective of the city. And any additional areas in the picture outside the city could be explicitly labeled in the photo caption so there is no confusion. That way it would show more of what Las Vegas is known for and give readers a better idea of location, specifics, etc. As I said, all outside areas would be labeled explicitly to avoid confusion. 30 March 2010 Bporter28 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bporter28 (talk • contribs) 02:18, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, you keep repeating that. Bottom line is the by consensus there is no Las Vegas article which might address your concerns. As everyone else keeps repeating, there is a clear division for the city article, and the strip is not in the city. We know what you want, but there is no consensus for that. Vegaswikian (talk) 02:47, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but the Strip is what the area is famous for. I would make sure to include a description or caption that designated exactly where the city ended. This way, it would stay true to the article and the city boundaries would be clearly stated in the article, but the reader could also see the well known portion surrounding the valley. 30 March 2010 Bporter28 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bporter28 (talk • contribs) 05:21, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

As the discussion clearly shows, consensus has not been reached on the proposed change. The picture in question should be left in its original format. Larry (talk) 13:21, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Still waiting for full agreement. 31 March 2010 Bporter28 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bporter28 (talk • contribs) 02:47, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't understand your question. There is consensus to leave the photo as it was. Consensus is what you wind up with on the encyclopedia. The fact that you don't agree with consensus does not mean that consensus is wrong. Not everyone agrees with consensus in every case. Vegaswikian (talk) 02:59, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Rather odd that someone who has been editing Wikipedia for over four years is unfamiliar with Wikipedia's peculiar use of the term "consensus". --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 15:25, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I understand consensus. The fact that you agree with consensus does not make it right either. I added that comment because there was a lack of discussion on the board. Anyhow, I am still proposing the change as the new photo would better serve the article, show better the geographical surroundings and location of the city, etc. 1 April 2010 Bporter28 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bporter28 (talk • contribs) 19:52, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Also, as previously stated by user 70.170.020.107,

"This is splitting hairs, IMO. There's a variety of reasons for the reasons why the region is partitioned the way it is, and while I'd like for the valley to have it's own version of a Bill 103 and merge up, the fact is that this is that Wikipedia isn't a civics lesson. Thousands of books refer to the Strip as Las Vegas regardless of political boundaries, and even the county-run McCarran International Airport refers to itself as from Las Vegas. At the very bare minimum, at least get a picture focusing on the Stratosphere, since it's the most iconic structure within city limits." 2 April 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bporter28 (talk • contribs) 05:20, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

You do not have consensus for this change, yet you keep doing it. Does this somehow seem in keeping with Wikipedia policy to you? --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 05:48, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

I am not asking consensus for that picture change. The picture I keep swapping is a better temporary picture until we resolve the issue. If you had been part of the discussion at the beginning, you would know that I am asking consensus for a different picture that I wish to upload in order to better serve the article. 3 April 2010 Bporter28 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bporter28 (talk • contribs) 05:07, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

And yet again you fail to explain why a low resolution picture is better then one with a much higher resolution. To my eye they cover pretty much the same area. Vegaswikian (talk) 05:44, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

I have continuously explained why the picture is better. It is clearer in quality and shows more of te surrounding area, mountains, etc. It shows the geographical location and environment in which the city is encompassed in. Just because a picture is higher resolution does not mean the quality of the shot is better or clearer. 4 April 2010 Bporter28 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.224.84.185 (talk) 18:28, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

You have continuously put forth your opinion, and the consensus is against you. Time to move on. --Larry (talk) 19:10, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Larry, the consensus was not made and was regarding another picture. I am simply proposing a cleaner version of the current photo at this point in time. My last message was addressed solely to answer Vegaswikian's question. He stated that I hadn't given my opinion on the new matter, so now I have. This is a different topic. Thank you. 4 April 2010 Bporter28 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bporter28 (talk • contribs) 20:02, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, this part of the discussion is about another picture - and the consensus here too is to leave it alone. P.S.: please remember to sign your posts. SineBot gets around to correcting it, but once in a while someone will read a post before this occurs. --Larry (talk) 20:15, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

So far, the only person the comment on this particular part of the discussion is you. And I will sign, not a problem. Thanks for letting me know. --User:Bporter28 (talk) 22:48, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

The photo Downtown_Las_Vegas.jpg is the proposed photo. Same area, but clearer and with more detail. --User:Bporter28 (talk) 15:23 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I would also like to, one last time, direct your attention to the fact that the Las Vegas wiki page is the only one this explicitly concerned with containing the smallest amount of surrounding area in the top photo. May I also suggest removing the top photo to avoid conflict all together or perhaps replacing it with a vital landmark within the city, such as with other U.S. cities on Wikipedia. --User:Bporter28 (talk) 22:52 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Repeated changing an article when there is no consensus to change is disruptive. You are not being ignored, this discussion has reached an end. If you continue to change the article you will likely receive warnings like {{uw-vandalism2}} or {{uw-own1}} or {{uw-ewblock}}. Vegaswikian (talk) 00:05, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Split Public Transport (per City) into a Category

Occurred to me that details of Vegas Public Transport and its Schedules should be on a separate page. Duh? The point being, that such a move should be done across cities in Wikipedia overall, right? Then we could also have a central page called Public Transport, with links to all of them. Also, in time, this would allow some automated systems that may even update the major timetables! Gwrede (talk) 22:07, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Adding time tables gets into WP:TRAVEL and WP:NOTADIRECTORY. As to a separate page, we pretty much have that covered under RTC Transit. I'm not sure that the city is still operating any bus service. Didn't they drop the last of their service last year when they turned over the DTC to the RTC? On the more general issue of doing this on a global basis, I don't see that happening since in many areas transportation is regional. Even the transit system for NYC runs well north of the city (50 miles or so) covers two states and both sides of the Hudson River as I recall. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:50, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I concur with Vegaswikian. Gwrede seems to have mixed up Wikipedia with Wikitravel. (I contribute to both, by the way.) --Coolcaesar (talk) 00:47, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Page protected

The page is now indefinitely protect for excessive vandalism. This is in addition to the previous indefinite move protection. I have tried to use shorter periods for the protection, but it seems that as soon as the protection is lifted, the anon vandals return. If anyone thinks sufficient time has pasted for this action and think we should try lifting it again, leave a note here. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:59, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Maybe it should stay protected a little longer. But under the Climate section, it states the city receives "little rainfall, which occurs on only 29 days per year". It would be more accurate to state "which occurs about 29 days of the year". The words about or approximately would be better in that sentence as it cannot be said with accuracy that it is always, and will always be, exactly 29 days of rainfall per year, every year for the rest of time.