Talk:Williamsbridge, Bronx

	New York City portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

New York (state) Mid‑importance

	New York (state) portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York (state)Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state) articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

Please ntoe that user:wikiwiki718 has been adding an identical paragraph entitled Social Problems to many different areas of the Bronx. It is also inadequately referenced. See, for instance Parkchester.86.0.203.120 (talk) 04:58, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Map neighborhoods in NTA BX1201

The NYC Open Data site "2020 Neighborhood Tabulation Areas (NTAs) - Tabular". defines the NTA of BX1201 Williamsbridge-Olinville. These two neighborhoods can be shown on an interactive map that pulls in this data set. The division between the two is not clear.

Neighborhood Tabulation Area of Williamsbridge - Olinville (BX1201)

I propose adding this map since the NTA offers a clear georeferenced polygon that includes both Williamsbridge and Olinville. Any comments before making this addition? - DutchTreat (talk) 13:39, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think these NTA datasets make sense for us to use as the source of truth. They don't correspond to what most people know as neighborhoods. There is no such thing as "Williamsbridge-Olinville". Those are two neighborhoods that are adjacent to each other. There's oddities like distinct NTAs for the major parks. There's an NTA for Hart Island. What they call Spencer Estates is what most people would call Country Club. It looks like they lump Marble Hill in with Kingsbridge, which makes no sense at all since Marble Hill isn't even politically part of the Bronx. In short, this is a data set which makes sense for some statistical purpose that NYC has, but it's certainly not something we should be putting the wiki-seal-of-approval on as the definition of neighborhood boundaries. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:54, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your point, RoySmith. The NTA does not align well with common usage. There are instances when the NTA name is incorrect. In this case, bringing in the disused name of "Olinville" causes confusion. Below, I drew the neighborhood boundary based on interpreting the text from the article:

Williamsbridge starting from the north and moving clockwise are East 222nd Street to the north, Boston Road to the east, East Gun Hill Road to the south, and the Bronx River to the west.

There are important differences between the two areas. The current population data is based on NTA, see ref for "Table PL-P5 NTA: Total Population and Persons Per Acre - New York City Neighborhood Tabulation Areas*, 2010" There might be a place for referring to the NTA to more clearly define how the demographic and population information is collected. The city also publishes housing data for each NTA. This kind of information would be useful to quote in the future. - DutchTreat (talk) 13:29, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have serious concerns about drawing a map based on what our article says, because so much of our article is unsourced. For example, you wrote that Olinville is "disused". Why do you say that? It's certainly not disused in my experience. Presumably because there's some unsourced statement in the article that it's disused. Looks like that was added in Special:Diff/645039308 by @Epicgenius. Likewise with the neighborhood boundaries; you took them from the description in the article, but that's also unsourced, and in fact was tagged as needing a WP:RS by @HugoHelp in Special:Diff/975904736.

The important thing is to make sure everything in the article is properly sourced. Only once we're sure we've got a solid basis for knowing the neighborhood boundaries (to the extent that they are even knowable in any more than a vague way), should we be drawing maps. Presenting incorrect data with a pretty picture doesn't make the data any less incorrect. Let's not propagate WP:OR. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:19, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@RoySmith, the sentence Olinville is a disused neighborhood name for the area around Olinville Avenue in Williamsbridge actually comes from our Olinville, Bronx, article; that info had been in the Olinville page since at least 2008. At the time, I was more keen on merging short articles than adding references.

I glanced at the NY Times website just now, and I searched on Google as well, but I don't see any in-depth coverage of Olinville's boundaries. In fact, much of the coverage of Olinville seems to be about Olinville Avenue specifically. It's unfortunate, but without a reliable source, I don't know if we can mention the boundaries of Olinville with any certainty. – Epicgenius (talk) 15:28, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Heh. The bit about being "disused" was in the very first revision of Olinville, Bronx, contributed by an IP editor in 2004, when standards were quite a bit looser. We also have quite a bit about "proposed zoning changes", which dates back to 2015; I doubt it's still "proposed", and very much a WP:NOTNEWS kind of thing. I suspect this is typical of our coverage of NYC neighborhoods; lots of WP:OR, lots of current events, and poorly sourced in general. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:43, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Found plenty of contemporary news articles refering to Olinville:

-- RoySmith (talk) 16:04, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking as a mapmaker, I can wait to make a change until after these issues are settled. When (and if) the boundaries are sourced, then we can move forward with making a map. The census data is based on the NTA definition, I believe. Numbers like population and demographics could be misinterpreted when used outside of the context of how an NTA is defined. This aspect justifies explaining which NTA is being used. Using only the NTA name without a picture feels a bit lacking. The causal reader may not understand what is inside and outside of that boundary without graphic. Thank you RoySmith and Epicgenius for clarifying the work needed going forward. - DutchTreat (talk) 16:39, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly get that a picture helps the reader understand where the subject of the article is, which is a good thing. I think it would reasonable to provide illustrations such as you've done, as long as we make clear where the boundaries come from (i.e. WP:RS), and what the uncertainty is. If we don't have a RS that gives specific street boundaries, then an amorphous blob will at least give the reader an idea of where it is without implying greater precision than is justified.

This 1867 map is interesting; it shows "Olinville No 1" and "Olinville No 2". No clue what that's about. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:07, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

PS, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roi5V8ppi7Y starting at 15:38 has a good example of the kinds of mistakes which happen when people draw maps without a WP:RS, and how those mistakes can get propagated for quite a while. -- RoySmith (talk) 18:23, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]