Talk:Manhattan
There is a request, submitted by Lionsdude148, for an audio version of this article to be created. For further information, see WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia. The rationale behind the request is: "Important". |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Manhattan article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|||
| Article policies
|
||
| Archives: 1, 2, 3 | |||
| Manhattan has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| |
Archives | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| |||
| This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot I. Threads with no replies in 90 days may be automatically moved. |
Contents
Photo feedback requested withdrawn[edit]
please remove me from this conversation Beyond My Ken mekes me sick, and I have no desire to continue to be exposed to him in any way, please do not force me to interact with him this conversation is as far as I am concerned over, please disregard my comments concerns or my photo, I would rather it not be used, thank you!
External links modified[edit]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on Manhattan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20161025130428/http://gothamist.com/2012/05/21/do_you_refer_to_manhattan_as_the_ci.php to http://gothamist.com/2012/05/21/do_you_refer_to_manhattan_as_the_ci.php
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170804015340/https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20100406/manhattan/manhattan-may-be-media-capital-world-but-not-for-ipad-users to https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20100406/manhattan/manhattan-may-be-media-capital-world-but-not-for-ipad-users
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130530065722/http://www.northjersey.com/news/2012_Presidential_Election/Obama_inaugural_speech_references_Stonewall_riots.html to http://www.northjersey.com/news/2012_Presidential_Election/Obama_inaugural_speech_references_Stonewall_riots.html
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130530065722/http://www.northjersey.com/news/2012_Presidential_Election/Obama_inaugural_speech_references_Stonewall_riots.html to http://www.northjersey.com/news/2012_Presidential_Election/Obama_inaugural_speech_references_Stonewall_riots.html
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121203212639/http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20121029/east-village/video-dramatic-explosion-at-east-village-con-ed-plant to http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20121029/east-village/video-dramatic-explosion-at-east-village-con-ed-plant
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141020080917/http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20120111/downtown/downtown-baby-boom-sees-12-percent-increase-births to http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20120111/downtown/downtown-baby-boom-sees-12-percent-increase-births
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.northjersey.com/news/2012_Presidential_Election/Obama_inaugural_speech_references_Stonewall_riots.html
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170501154444/http://www.nydailynews.com/newswires/new-york/nyc-launches-ferry-service-queens-east-river-routes-article-1.3122046 to http://www.nydailynews.com/newswires/new-york/nyc-launches-ferry-service-queens-east-river-routes-article-1.3122046
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131323450400/http://www.coned.com/history/steam.asp to http://www.coned.com/history/steam.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete the "External links modified" sections if they want, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:36, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
External links modified[edit]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Manhattan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930033802/http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=aHWGwSJjpbOU&refer=us to https://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=aHWGwSJjpbOU&refer=us
- Replaced archive link x with https://web.archive.org/web/20131323450400/http://www.coned.com/history/steam.asp on http://www.coned.com/history/steam.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete the "External links modified" sections if they want, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:32, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
GAR request[edit]
I am going through the old GA requests and one was requested for this article in March 2017. The edit summary was worst GA I've seen-some lacks of refs, huge/many imgs, ed section just a list, poor fmt, etc.
. As someone who has been dealing with lots of GA requests I can safely say it is far from the worst GA I have ever seen. Normally I would just remove the request, but this is a big, important article so thought I would give Ɱ a chance to elaborate. Remember it must be judged against the WP:GACR. Images, formatting and presence of lists do not necessarily disqualify an article from Good Status. Personally I have some issues with the size of the article, but it falls (just) within acceptable limits. I dislike the puffery in the lead, but it is not as bad as it has been on other similar articles. Overall I think it is fine to keep its status. AIRcorn (talk) 00:49, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
- On second thought there are issues with the lead that do need fixing. The lead should summarise the article and it doesn't do that very well at all. It has one throwaway sentence on the history, very little on geography and demographics. This is a good article criteria and will need to be fixed. It should be relatively easy one, but it will mean some information will need to be removed so the lead does not become excessive. AIRcorn (talk) 00:55, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
Manhattan[edit]
- Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • • Most recent review
- Result: Keep consensus. See discussion below for more information Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 17:49, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
I came across this article through the GAR request template added a year ago by Ɱ.[1] My first thoughts was that it was a pretty good article, in fact I still think it is a pretty good article. However there are major issues with the lead. I detailed these thoughts on the talk page before opening the reassessment (Talk:Manhattan#GAR request). To clarify, part of the Good Article criteria is that the article complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation
. Unfortunately this one does not meet the lead requirement as it does not summarize the body of the article with appropriate weight
. If we divide the articles body up by percentage we have roughly.
- Entymology 1%
- History 16%
- Geography 22%
- Landscape 9%
- Economy 11%
- Education 4%
- Culture 6%
- Sport 5%
- Government 8%
- Housing 2%
- Industry 16&
Now the lead does not have to match this exactly, but when one sentence (~4% of the lead) covers the history the appropriate weight is wrong. Geography is also under represented. By comparison over 25% of the lead revolves around the economy. Outside the infobox in some cases there is no information on geology, climate, government or infrastructure.
There is also a lot of cites in the lead, a red flag for unique information added that is not in the body. Of these 28 are not repeated in the body.
Another issue is the WP:Puffery. Sentences like Manhattan is often described as the cultural, financial, media, and entertainment capital of the world
and New York City has been called both the most economically powerful city and the leading financial center of the world
don't really belong in the lead as written. I have come across worse in New York articles and would probably overlook this if it wasn't rated a Good Article. It would probably be alright if this was mentioned in the actual body of the article by expanding on these descriptions. You could argue that articles from The New York Times describing New York as the foo capital of the world
are biased, but seeing as we use described it is not so bad.
There may be other issues, but to my mind the major issue is the lead and if that is sorted I will be happy. However, if other editors want to bring up additional issues then they are welcome.
Note: Usually I conduct these reviews as individual assessments, but I have conflicted with a major editor of this article in the past, so thought it best to keep this as a community review. AIRcorn (talk) 09:18, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
- Keep as Good Article. I think that Aircorn may be applying Featured article standards this GA. While not perfect, I think that the article is well-written, well-cited, has broad coverage, is NPOV, is stable, and has images (if anything, too many images). Those are the criteria for a GA and I believe that it easily passes. —hike395 (talk) 20:34, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
- No, I am definitely applying the Good Article criteria. I was very careful to link this above, but will do so again.
- Criteria 1b says
complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation
(bolding mine) - WP:LEAD says
summarize the body of the article with appropriate weight
- My argument is that it does not follow WP:LEAD and therefore does not meet the Good Article Criteria 1b. Remember this is not a !vote, so it has to be shown that it currently does meet this criteria, or fixed so that it does. AIRcorn (talk)
- It is not a !vote, but there has to be consensus to change a longstanding status, like with any other issue in Wikipedia. Castncoot (talk) 01:38, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
- I've buffed up the historical content in the lead and added an important geographical feature. I would like to emphasize this time, however, that Manhattan is not a city but rather the core borough of NYC, and there is only a limited amount of geographical discussion that can take place in the lead about a 22+ square mile subset of any city. The human element of the borough is predominant. Castncoot (talk) 02:55, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
- It is not a !vote, but there has to be consensus to change a longstanding status, like with any other issue in Wikipedia. Castncoot (talk) 01:38, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
- Keep as Good Article. I think that Aircorn may be applying Featured article standards this GA. While not perfect, I think that the article is well-written, well-cited, has broad coverage, is NPOV, is stable, and has images (if anything, too many images). Those are the criteria for a GA and I believe that it easily passes. —hike395 (talk) 20:34, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
- Comment: If the only substantial problem is the lead, it would be pretty easy to sort it out. However, there are also a bunch of unsourced sentences and paragraphs, which makes me hesitant to !vote "Keep". I like what Castncoot has done so far, but some more improvement is needed to the prose, especially regarding the sourcing. Complicating the matter, the "unsourced" sections I'm referring to are sentences like
Some of the best known New York City public high schools are located in Manhattan, including Beacon High School, Stuyvesant High School, Fiorello H. LaGuardia High School, High School of Fashion Industries, Eleanor Roosevelt High School, NYC Lab School, Manhattan Center for Science and Mathematics, Hunter College High School, and High School for Math, Science and Engineering at City College. Bard High School Early College, a hybrid school created by Bard College, serves students from around the city.
Obviously if you searched all these high schools you'd know they are in Manhattan, but then we run the risk of WP:CITEKILL. epicgenius (talk) 17:23, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
- Epicgenius, I like what you have done with trimming some of the outdated material from the article so far. If you could please also do the same with fixing as per what you've described just above with the Education section (and/or other sections), that would also be appreciated. Best, Castncoot (talk) 20:53, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
- Re: Education: I don't think it's necessary to provide sources to support that these schools are in Manhattan; the objectionable part is "best known". That could easily be corrected by using "Some of the notable New York City public high schools …" because they are notable as they have Wikipedia articles. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 01:34, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
- Keep. I think all of the issues with the lead have been fixed sufficiently. Some of the outdated material may have to be trimmed as well, but it is well-sourced. epicgenius (talk) 14:18, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
- Re: Education: I don't think it's necessary to provide sources to support that these schools are in Manhattan; the objectionable part is "best known". That could easily be corrected by using "Some of the notable New York City public high schools …" because they are notable as they have Wikipedia articles. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 01:34, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
- Epicgenius, I like what you have done with trimming some of the outdated material from the article so far. If you could please also do the same with fixing as per what you've described just above with the Education section (and/or other sections), that would also be appreciated. Best, Castncoot (talk) 20:53, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
- Keep I agree with the basis for the GAR, namely does the LEAD meet GA criterion. I am coming to it post any changes Castncoot made. I think the history paragraph that has been added adequately addresses that concern. As for the puffery, I think the two phrases of concern are
Manhattan is often described as the cultural, financial, media, and entertainment capital of the world
andNew York City has been called both the most economically powerful city and the leading financial center of the world
. For the cultural, etc while there are five RS most of them basically seem to be New York sources or people calling New York that. I think perhaps with some different sourcing this phrase could be saved and does provide important context. For the comment about being called the most economically powerful I don't think the LEAD really loses anything if that close is removed. Ideally those are both fixed but their mere presence wouldn't be enough to remove GA status. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:24, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
Given that there has been no comments in 4 weeks and my status as UNINVOLVED per the Guidelines for community reassessment discussion (as I've only participated in the GAR review process and did not nominate it for GAR) I am judging consensus to be keep. Because I did weigh in on the topic, despite this action being OK by the guidelines, I wish to give other editors a chance to either further discuss the article or disagree with my reading of consensus before I formally close it. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 07:49, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
Manhattan vs. Manhattan Island[edit]
Why does Manhattan Island not have its own article? I know this has been touched on in previous discussion sections, but I could not find a clear reason. The borough and island are not coextensive. Just as the political entity and island are distinguished in the case of Ireland (the Republic of Ireland and Ireland, respectively), as well as the historical political entity and island of Great Britain (the Kingdom of Great Britain and Great Britain, respectively), so the political entity and island of Manhattan should be distinguished. If they were coextensive with each other, then the merge would make sense, but they are not. Thoughts? Michipedian (talk) 05:40, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
Maps in all 5 boroughs' articles[edit]
For context this has to do with recent map removals in this article, as well as the Brooklyn, The Bronx, Queens and Staten Island articles.
@ImprovedWikiImprovment: I'm opening this discussion because it seems other editors, e.g. Alansohn and Castncoot, may find the maps of New York state, the USA, and Earth to be helpful. Would it be better if we used an interactive map using {{maplink}} (drawing the boundaries of each borough using JSON and then placing it as a mapframe map within the infobox)? That way people could zoom in or out as they wish. epicgenius (talk) 20:11, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
- I think Alansohn stated it best in the Talk:Queens edit summary – that these are constructive maps which help the readers in the context of global standalone articles about significant entities. Castncoot (talk) 20:20, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Epicgenius and Castncoot:Also I did NOT remove the map of New York State. IWI (chat) 20:29, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
- Just noting that in this edit and this edit, you did remove the state map. Doesn't really matter much to me personally (I'd rather have an interactive map, now that it's possible to actually do so), but I wanted to point out the fact. epicgenius (talk) 21:28, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
@Epicgenius:Nope. I didn’t remove the state maps in either. Look more closely. IWI (chat) 22:05, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
- OK, my bad, but still doesn't hurt to have the other maps as well. epicgenius (talk) 22:06, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
- I’m in agreement EXCEPT for the pushpin map of New York City, which is a duplicate of the map above. IWI (chat) 22:19, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Epicgenius- you're the tech savvy one- can you make interactive maps of each of the boroughs, and maybe even of the whole city, below the pushpin map? Castncoot (talk) 02:48, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Castncoot: I think so. I'll look to see if there are any freely licensed JSON maps online. epicgenius (talk) 12:23, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Epicgenius- you're the tech savvy one- can you make interactive maps of each of the boroughs, and maybe even of the whole city, below the pushpin map? Castncoot (talk) 02:48, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
- I’m in agreement EXCEPT for the pushpin map of New York City, which is a duplicate of the map above. IWI (chat) 22:19, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
Lol I wondered what you were talking about, sorry that's my eyesight (last reply that I reverted) Yes Epicgenius, that would be helpful. IWI (chat) 08:09, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
- @ImprovedWikiImprovment and Castncoot: OK, here's a map of New York City, using a Wikipedia KML file (Template:Attached KML/New York City). It's a proof of concept. Should we do this for other borough articles? epicgenius (talk) 13:01, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Castncoot and Epicgenius:Yes and they should replace the pushpin maps. IWI (chat) 13:26, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
- OK, I'll get to these soon. epicgenius (talk) 03:59, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Castncoot and Epicgenius:Yes and they should replace the pushpin maps. IWI (chat) 13:26, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
Indeed. IWI (chat) 08:24, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
- @ImprovedWikiImprovment and Castncoot: I've added maps to all five boroughs' articles. Let me know if anything needs adjusting. I'm aware that the maps aren't centered and will fix that later. epicgenius (talk) 19:25, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
Excellent, except for what you mentioned, I can't see an issue. IWI (chat) 19:41, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks Epicgenius, will also re-caption them as now they are no longer tethered within New York City, and to clarify to the reader that these are now interactive. Castncoot (talk) 00:29, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
- And I was eventually able to load the interactive map of the whole city onto the city article. Castncoot (talk) 02:07, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
- Spoken Wikipedia requests
- Wikipedia good articles
- Wikipedia CD Selection-GAs
- Geography and places good articles
- Old requests for peer review
- GA-Class New York (state) articles
- High-importance New York (state) articles
- GA-Class New York City articles
- Top-importance New York City articles
- WikiProject New York City articles
- GA-Class WikiProject Cities articles
- High-importance WikiProject Cities articles
- GA-Class Islands articles
- WikiProject Islands articles
- Wikipedia level-5 vital articles in Geography
- Wikipedia GA-Class vital articles in Geography
- Wikipedia GA-Class level-5 vital articles
- Wikipedia pages with to-do lists