Talk:Allegheny City Central

Bill - You did not create the Allegheny City Central Page - I did. Could someone help assist restoring the original page I created. It appears my original article was deleted and recreated by Bill. Thx. Bradsp (talk) 02:37, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I did not delete your article, nor did I mark it for deletion. The first time I went to the page Allegheny City Central, it was a dead link. I never even saw your original attempt. What I did was to create a redirect in the empty articlespace pointing to the prose I wrote in Central Northside (Pittsburgh) regarding the branding strategy. —Bill Price (nyb) 15:40, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article stealing

Bill if you want to redirect then argue that point. Using speedy delete without any discussion and then quickly recreating the same article is just stealing. You are not the author. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bradsp (talk • contribs) 03:12, 26 September 2012‎

I'm sorry, but see my comments above. I had absolutely nothing to do with the deletion of your original article. There is no such thing as stealing an article, and even if there were, you are not assuming good faith. —Bill Price (nyb) 15:40, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This should be a redirect

It's true that I'm the creator of this incarnation of the "article"; however, I created it as a redirect. Bradsp (talk · contribs) has been trying to do a copy/paste move from Central Northside (Pittsburgh) to Allegheny City Central. (The latter name is a rebranding of the neighborhood which is not officially recognized by the city.) The first one was speedy-deleted, and I recreated as a redirect. I have *nothing* to do with Bradsp's copy/paste actions. I created this as a redirect, and that's what it is supposed to be. I completely support excluding the copy/paste prose which Bradsp keeps adding. —Bill Price (nyb) 01:59, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bill - You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about so please don't edit tamper with the article. I think it is being made very clear to you that the Allegheny City Central Brand is recognized by our community and businesses. This is a fact. The Central Northside is not a name known or used outside of some official dusty tomb in Pittsburgh. The name you are trying to force on our neighborhood is simply not what we call ourselves EVER and it is not what any other person in Pittsburgh EVER calls us. Google the name "Central Northside" it has been around for maybe 50 years - it is a stale term not being used outside of crime statistics and council district. Now Google our historic district name "Mexican War Streets" This is the name we all use even though not all of the Allegheny City Central neighborhood is part of this district. Allegheny City Central is a historic brand name describing our entire neighborhood. CNS describes a city designation with random boundaries.

Bradsp (talk) 02:37, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For better or worse, Central Northside is the official name used on municipal maps and on demographic reports such as the census. It's the official neighborhood name. A branding strategy conducted explicitly for the purpose of increasing property values doesn't trump that fact. It's totally fine to state that CNS is "also known as" ACC and to have article prose explaining the situation, but branching or moving CNS is unwarranted and would break unity with other neighborhood article names. —Bill Price (nyb) 15:40, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Contested deletion

These are different articles with some similar material. I agree the material should be edited and should not overlap...Fine. Allegheny City Central is a name used by residence and businesses to describe where they live and do business and it is also a brand fully and intentionally disassociated from the name Central Northside by a majority of our community. The City of Pittsburgh uses a name called Central Northside however this name is not EVER used or known by people in Pittsburgh.

Allegheny City Central diverges in meaning from the Central Northside and most importantly it is a neighborhood brand. Obscure names like Central Northside which has been proven to not actually exist outside of a dusty lot and plot book in the City of Pittsburgh should not hijack a brand and identity shared by an entire community.

Bradsp (talk) 02:04, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Allegheny City Central

I posted this note on Bradsp's user talk page; it was summarily deleted without comment, so I am restoring it here. —Bill Price (nyb) 02:09, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I honestly don't have the time to go into this fully, so here's the bullet-point version:

I've been writing and editing Pittsburgh articles for years. Though I've been less active lately, I'm one of the best-established Pittsburgh editors.
Our established convention has been to use OFFICIAL neighborhood names, not rebranded names.
- That means, for example, Perry North (Pittsburgh) instead of Observatory Hill.
- It also means that we don't have articles for "brand neighborhoods" like Park Place which aren't officially recognized.
Some exceptions: in cases like Squirrel Hill North and Squirrel Hill South, we might collapse them into one Squirrel Hill article, but the article must then make it clear in prose that there's an official distinction between the sections of the neighborhood. Beyond the official neighborhood names, we also sometimes have a more "regional" article like for North Side (Pittsburgh) or, in very rare cases, an article for a subset of a neighborhood like Four Mile Run (Pittsburgh).

Renaming the CNS article "Allegheny City Central" does not fit into any of the rules or exceptions laid out above. The most direct point of comparison is with Perry North. Regardless of preferred local branding, we've been going with official names. If you want to bring this up in WikiProject Pittsburgh, be my guest, but please stop being disruptive in the meantime. —Bill Price (nyb) 01:54, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are not an expert on this material as you claim Bill and you certainly can not make up the rules as you see fit. Our neighborhood decided this issue. Also you are pointing out inconsistencies in your own arguments and claims.

What kind of a person forwards a direct message to a group Bill. Classy. What kind of a person attacks other editors first before understanding the issue? You were deleted from my talk page because you attack before discussion.

Bradsp (talk) 02:54, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The only type of "direct message" on Wikipedia is an email. User talk pages are explicitly public, and Wikipedia works on the assumption of openness. Deleting another user's comments on your own talk page is allowed, but when those comments are relevant to an ongoing article-related discussion, it's not inappropriate at all to port those comments over to the locus of discussion. —Bill Price (nyb) 15:40, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RFC at WikiProject Pittsburgh

See here. —Bill Price (nyb) 15:49, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Central Northside is my opinion, as a very deeply involved Pittsburgh area contributor here I can empathize with the neighborhood trying to rebrand (I know some of those in "Uptown" aka the Bluff and the "University District" aka Oakland would like to rebrand). It is good news that the citizens of the CNS have pushed this forward, but without anything official from the city (I'd settle for even a resolution or acknowledgment) it is hard to fit this into an encyclopedic use. Although I'd be the first to assist with any well intentioned rebranding the city council and planning boards exist to debate issues just like this one in a public, fully disclosed and transparent way with input from all segments of the population and community institutions. A neighborhood group while important does not typically have these public requirements and safeguards and have been known to decide some really strange narrow and myopic things from time to time over the commonwealth, its why encyclopedias revise naming conventions typically when a government body that is required to seek public input, comment, debate and discussion and then are accountable to that community for their own jobs in a few months actually approves naming convention changes. The only way I could see Wikipedia changing it without a move by the city council or department is if such media outlets like KDKA, WTAE, PG, City Paper all started to refer to the area as such, to a degree that common parlance has evolved from a dusty city planning book. Short of that we need to keep in mind that as an encyclopedia it would be chaos if every "concerned group of citizens" dictates demanded a change in descriptions, it would defeat the purpose of even having an encyclopedia. Marketdiamond (talk) 21:38, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]