Jump to content

Talk:Buffalo, New York/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4

Suburban schools

Re: this edit summary, the comment only applies to the "Within City Limits" section. But in the interest of not edit warring, I could not respond via edit summary. Powers T 13:16, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

However, after a month to cool off and a RFC which shows that consensus is clearly against your view you have started adding the information that you want back into the article. You say that you don't want to edit war but your actions are clearly saying something else. Shinerunner (talk) 23:30, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Hey JT, what is the problem? You are clearly against the majority decision of the RFC. Please stop trying to add things to this article that have nothing to do with its tpoic. This is foolish and will get you reported next time. You seem to otherwise be an editor that can understand what topical information is but you are letting your emotions get the best of you. There is simply no reason to add suburban schools to an article about a city. You might not agree, however everyone else in the RFC did. Please respect that. Tommycw1 (talk) 06:37, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Why the hell do you keep calling me JT? Anyway, I didn't add that information to the article this month. What I saw is that someone added the information to a new section that made it clear that the schools are suburban schools. I thought that was acceptable under the results of the RFC so I restored the section that someone else added when it was removed. I did that once, then brought it up here for discussion. After no one responded to the discussion, I restored it again. That's how things work here. Powers T 15:29, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Actually consensus is the way things work around here and it was very clear from the RFC how and where this information should be incorporated. It seems to me that you just won't give up on your quest regardless of what anyone else says. That no one responded during your set time frame didn't matter as consensus was clear. It really won't matter if it's next week, next month or next year you won't stop until you get your way. Shinerunner (talk) 17:26, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Consensus can change. Given that someone else added a new section, I thought that was a new situation that wasn't covered by the previous discussion. So I restored it, then brought it up for discussion. I'm not sure what else you want from me. Powers T 20:56, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Consensus can change, but it's rather apparent that it hasn't in this case. That the information added was quickly reverted is good evidence that consensus remains the same. Further evidence is the lack of any new arguments presented here on the talk page. That whoever added the information employed a backdoor method of inserting it, by creating a new section, is beside the point. Consensus is that the information does not belong, regardless of how the article is structured. Rivertorch (talk) 22:34, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Regardless, I think you'll find I acted appropriately at all times here. There's no need for the ridiculous accusations leveled at me here and on my talk page. Powers T 02:14, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

African American Churches

The Vine Street African Methodist Episcopal Church seems to have been forgotten. This was an important institution in the African American community back to the 1840s. The AME Church was located on Vine Street between Elm and Oak. The two contiguous blocks of Vine Street and Vine Alley were razed in the late 1920s by the William Street extension from Michigan to Broadway.

If you have information, with sources, about this church by all means please add it to the article. The section about the history of Buffalo is small summary as the main article is History of Buffalo, New York. If there is enough information an independent article can be started about the African Methodist Episcopal Church (Buffalo, New York).Shinerunner (talk) 11:21, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Summary

I figured it would be a good idea to discuss this, so that I'm not starting an editing war or anything. I changed the summary a bit a couple of weeks ago, and this part was recently changed. Changes are italicized.

"The latter part of the 20th Century saw a reversal of fortunes: Great Lakes shipping was rerouted by the opening of the St. Lawrence Seaway, and steel mills and other heavy industry relocated to places like China.[10] With the start of Amtrak in the 1970s, Buffalo Central Terminal was also abandoned because no train routes passed through the station, and trains were rerouted to nearby Depew, New York (Buffalo-Depew) and Exchange Street Station. By 1990 the city had fallen back below its 1900 population levels.[11]"

I'd like to move the added information to the history section to help keep the summary from growing too long (it's already getting there, but it does give a good idea of what Buffalo is and where it came from, I think). This information, while accurate, seems a little particular for a summary. The mention of train rerouting was originally referring to the large-scale changes in rail traffic that saw the diminuation of the city's role as a rail center: not the less significant, albeit regrettable, change in Buffalo's train stations. Also, mentioning that the steel mills moved to China isn't mentioned in the citation attached to it, so we either need another source or to remove it entirely.

While I'm discussing things, I'd also like to change the statistic from the "Buffalo-Niagara-Cattaraugus Combined Statistical Area" to the one for the "Buffalo-Niagara Metropolitan Area." I realize that the BNCCSA is a legitimate entity, but I don't think it's appropriate for the "Buffalo" article, at least not right up front like that. While Buffalo and Niagara Falls form a continuous metropolitan area, a city-like entity, you'd be hard pressed to say the same of the area from Buffalo to Olean. Is this a legitimate argument?

Again, I thought I should discuss these things, because they would basically involve me undoing changes to edits that I made. Due to the dubious nature of such an action, I figured I'd better not do it rashly.

Willseychew (talk) 19:37, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

No bison near Buffalo?

I see this was one of the first issues raised on the talk page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Buffalo,_New_York/Archive_1#Buffalo_in_Area.3F), but the statement "what is clear is that there were no bison in the area" is apparently incorrect. The source for this is the Encyclopedia Britannica. Numerous maps of the range of the bison show it to be present in Western New York. Buffalo appears to be near the edge of the historic range of bison, but it's not clearly outside of that range. See http://www.discoverlife.org/nh/tx/Vertebrata/Mammalia/Bovidae/Bos/bison/images/Bison_bison_map.mx.jpg, or search Google images for "bison range map" (no quotes). I don't know whether or not Buffalo was named for the animal, but it is fairly clear that there were bison in the area.192.104.39.2 (talk) 15:48, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

The refs above did not show me that there were bison in the immediate area of Buffalo. Here is another ref about bison. See http://www.discoverlife.org/20/q?search=Bos There it is stated that bison were sited in Tennesee1archie99 (talk) 15:04, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Grain Mill Center

BUFFALO IS DESCRIBED AS AT ONE TIME BEING THE LARGEST GRAIN MILLING CENTER IN THE COUNTRY. IF MEMORY SERVES ME CORRECTLY, BUFFALO WAS IN FACT THE LARGEST GRAIN MILLING CENTER IN THE WORLD. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.186.136.26 (talk) 01:06, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm excited by that information, but my source only said in the country. If you can find a source that says in the world, please change it! Willseychew (talk) 00:03, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Population

The current intro mentions this line at the end of the first paragraph: "If the neighboring Regional Municipality of Niagara in Canada is included, the population of the Greater Buffalo-Niagara Region is 1,631,418 residents." I've removed it, because I don't understand its relevancy here. Canada is an entirely different country, so I would think it would be outside the "jurisdiction" (for lack of a better word) of the Greater Buffalo region...and I don't recall Canada and the US merging yet. In addition, there is no citation for the number of residents, and including the Niagara region to the extent of Canada pushes the boundaries of being relevant in an article focused on Buffalo. Nitroblu (talk) 08:05, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

I agree. It looked like a way to get the biggest population number possible but stretched things too far. --Beirne (talk) 14:08, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
I was the person who originally posted the comment about the international population. Although I understand that this was a bit of a stretch, I would like you two to understand my reasoning. The Buffalo-Niagara region and the Regional Municipality of Niagara have very strong cultural ties. As somebody from the Buffalo area, I can say this with great confidence from my personal experience alone. In fact, Ft. Erie, Ontario is much closer to Buffalo than my home town of East Amhest, NY. I am assuming that you two are either from Buffalo, Canada, or somewhere close by. You must understand the significance of this international relationship as well as I do. My original thought in posting that sentence was to portray that to people who are not from the area. Most people have no idea how close Buffalo and Canada are to one another. It should be portrayed in some way on the Wikipedia page. Most cities calculate their populations by counting all communities within a certain radius of the center. In the Buffalo area, a significant part of the geographical area is in Canada. This is very relevant to Buffalo and Southern Ontario and I believe it should be portrayed in the first couple paragraphs (in some way). It seems a little strange that a population should have no statistical relationship with another that is across a small river. I suggest you look into the articles on El Paso-Juarez and San Diego-Tijuana. For some reason, the Mexican-US border cities seem to be more united. They have done a pretty good job of making wikipedia pages to outline the relationships that these cities have with one another. Maybe this reflects the cultural situation. Maybe those cities have more in common with one another than Buffalo, Niagara Falls, St. Catharines and Ft. Erie. Either way, I would like to see us embrace a bit more regionalism. It would be nice to have it on the Buffalo page (and the Municiapality of Niagara one as well) .--Andrewdcarlo (talk) 18:39, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
I understand that there are a lot of dynamics between Buffalo and the cities on the Canadian side. That should be documented with a reference about the combined area, though, and the reference should be better than the ones for El Paso-Juarez, which are a research paper and a committee document. Greater Buffalo is clearly documented, as it is defined by the census bureau, but trying to combine the two sides in population may be more difficult. Another approach to show the relationship would be to describe the specifics of the interaction between the city of Buffalo and Canada. --Beirne (talk) 00:01, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
I'm sorry Andrew, but I also think crossing that international border is an inappropriate statistic for a metropolitan population. While I love going to Canada as much as the next Buffalonian, crossing the border is no longer a casual everyday occurrence like it used to be. While Fort Erie may have once been a Buffalo suburb, it's now more of a quiet little town with a nice view of the city. To the casual reader, it looks like a cheap way to make Buffalo seem bigger, I'm afraid, despite your good intentions. I even think that "Buffalo-Niagara-Cattaraugus Combined Statistical Area" should be changed back to the population of the "Buffalo-Niagara Metropolitan Area." I realize that the BNCCSA is a legitimate entity, but I don't think it's appropriate for the "Buffalo" article, at least not right up front like that. While Buffalo and Niagara Falls form a continuous metropolitan area, a city-like entity, you'd be hard pressed to say the same of the area from Buffalo to Olean. Just like including the Canadian population, it seems like a cheap ploy to boost the population number. Willseychew (talk) 00:15, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
You'd be surprised. I live in Fort Erie and I am in Buffalo far more often than I am in Niagara Falls, ON or St. Catharines. I have an E-ZPass on my car, a Nexus card and don't feel any different in Buffalo and the surrounding area than I do back home, except for the blight and other things in American cities that simply don't exist on the same level in Canadian ones. In the reverse direction, there are 10,000 seasonal cottage residents from Buffalo and the surrounding area who make Fort Erie their home during the summer, and thousands more who do the same in Port Colborne and Wainfleet. That's no small potatoes. While I wouldn't go so far as to say it is a single metropolitan area and I agree that the ties aren't nearly as strong as they used to be - has Byron Brown even ever set foot in Canada, let alone Fort Erie? And the WKBW News Bureau in St. Catharines closed years ago - the ties are still there, and far stronger than your comments may lead others to believe. Snickerdo (talk) 23:54, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Name Origin

The section on the origin of the name of Buffalo is mostly nonsense. I'd rewrite it but based on previous experience, I know that changes to this subject never stick.

For example, "Buffalo River may have been named before the city of Buffalo..." The one thing about the name origin that is definitely known and is generally agreed upon and is based on evidence, is that Buffalo (formerly known as Buffalo Creek) did in fact get its name from the creek of the same name.

Also, the stuff about French Fort Le Boeuf in Pennsylvania as the origin of the name of the city in New York is nothing more than ridiculous speculation with no basis in evidence. GullyWalker (talk) 14:18, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Crappy Picture

Can someone get a better picture up in here? This one looks like a bad acid trip. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.186.148.80 (talk) 19:34, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Which picture do you mean? Powers T 19:21, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

The picture of the prudential building uploaded by DipNDave as well as the Erie County building are all badly photoshopped with an improper use of HDR that makes them look unrealistic. I don't feel they convey an appropriate voice of neutrality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.14.143.5 (talk) 20:56, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Montage

Why was the main montage removed? --98.117.171.134 (talk) 16:45, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Good question. The person listed no reason for removal. My opinion is that the current photo shows a more "impressive" buffalo skyline, but the montage appears cleaner. At the very least, the montage should be moved back into the article. Fortunate4now (talk) 00:28, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
    • I believe montages are frowned upon except as the lead image. Powers T 18:20, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
      • No kidding, I wonder why? I think we can all agree we need a good modern aerial shot of the city. Fortunate4now (talk) 02:28, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
        • I'm not entirely sure. WP:MONTAGE says, in part, "If a gallery would serve as well as a collage or montage, the gallery should be preferred, as galleries are easier to maintain and adjust better to user preferences." In most cases, a gallery would work just as well, but it's not an option for the lead. Powers T 15:51, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Western New York

If you are editing Buffalo and Western New York related articles, then it probably is your obligation to join WikiProject Western New York We cover all 4 major cities and 12 counties in the Western New York area improving articles, and if you'd like to, you can also help our new portal at Portal:Western New York. --Dekema2 (talk) 01:53, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Correction

No one is obliged to join any Wikipedia project. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:30, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

I am confused about the climate table

By which I mean this table, which is in the "Geography and climate" section:

Climate data for Buffalo, New York (Buffalo Niagara Int'l), 1981–2010 normals
Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Year
Record high °F (°C) 72
(22) 		71
(22) 		82
(28) 		94
(34) 		94
(34) 		97
(36) 		97
(36) 		99
(37) 		98
(37) 		92
(33) 		80
(27) 		74
(23) 		99
(37)
Mean daily maximum °F (°C) 31.2
(−0.4) 		33.3
(0.7) 		42.9
(6.1) 		55.0
(12.8) 		68.7
(20.4) 		75.3
(24.1) 		80.0
(26.7) 		78.4
(25.8) 		71.1
(21.7) 		59.0
(15.0) 		48.0
(8.9) 		36.1
(2.3) 		80.0
(26.7)
Mean daily minimum °F (°C) 18.5
(−7.5) 		19.2
(−7.1) 		26.0
(−3.3) 		36.8
(2.7) 		47.4
(8.6) 		57.3
(14.1) 		63.9
(17.7) 		60.8
(16.0) 		53.4
(11.9) 		42.7
(5.9) 		33.9
(1.1) 		24.1
(−4.4) 		18.5
(−7.5)
Record low °F (°C) −16
(−27) 		−20
(−29) 		−3
(−19) 		5
(−15) 		25
(−4) 		36
(2) 		43
(6) 		38
(3) 		32
(0) 		20
(−7) 		2
(−17) 		−10
(−23) 		−20
(−29)
Average precipitation inches (mm) 3.18
(81) 		2.49
(63) 		2.87
(73) 		3.01
(76) 		3.46
(88) 		3.66
(93) 		3.23
(82) 		3.26
(83) 		3.90
(99) 		3.52
(89) 		4.01
(102) 		3.89
(99) 		40.48
(1,028)
Average snowfall inches (cm) 25.3
(64) 		19.2
(49) 		12.9
(33) 		2.8
(7.1) 		0
(0) 		0
(0) 		0
(0) 		0
(0) 		0
(0) 		0
(0) 		7.9
(20) 		27.4
(70) 		95.5
(243)
Average precipitation days (≥ 0.01 in) 19.2 16.0 15.1 13.1 12.7 12.1 10.6 10.1 11.4 12.9 15.0 18.3 166.6
Average snowy days (≥ 0.1 in) 16.4 13.3 8.9 3.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.9 14.0 60.7
Mean monthly sunshine hours 91.3 108.0 163.7 204.7 258.3 287.1 306.7 266.4 207.6 159.4 84.4 69.0 2,206.6
Source 1: NOAA (extremes 1873–present, sun 1961–1990)[1][2]
Source 2: Weather Channel[3]

An editor changed a lot of these values (diff is here) which got my attention, because the citation didn't change. That means either that the source was formerly used inaccurately, or the person making the change just failed to include her new source (probably the latter in this case, since it's a redlinked editor).

But looking into it, I don't see where the old values came from either. The three sources given are these:

  • "NowData – NOAA Online Weather Data". National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Retrieved 2011-12-22.
  • "WMO Climate Normals for Buffalo/Greater Buffalo, NY 1961–1990". National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Retrieved December 10, 2013.
  • "Monthly Averages for Buffalo, NY". The Weather Channel. Retrieved 2010-12-19.

But

  • The first doesn't seem to show monthly average highs and lows, although it shows other date such as monthly averages (unless I'm missing something).
  • The second ends a quarter-century ago, which I wouldn't think that would be very useful anymore, what with the things are trending (besides which the label on the table is "1981–2010 normals"), in addition to which -- if I'm reading it right -- the data there doesn't appear to match either the old or the new values in our article. For instance, "element 2" (the MEAN column of "Maximum Dry Bulb Temperature") of that source gives the average July high as 26.8C, which is 80.24F. But our previous value was 79.9, which the editor changed to 80.0. November is 8.4C (47.1F) but our value was 47.6 which the editor changed to 48.0.
  • The third shows only whole integers, which we're not using.

On top of that and FWIW we show this graphic:
File:BuffaloAvgTemps.png
which isn't very useful for specifics (it's OK as an overview, if it's accurate (don't know) and legal for us to use (doubt it)), but for instance it shows the average May high as a very tiny bit above 65F, which our table formerly showed 66.5 and now shows 68.7.

So not sure what going on here. But we'd probably be better off with no table than the current situation, either before or after the recent changes. Herostratus (talk) 22:43, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

As further discussed here, these issues above really aren't valid at all. Just about anything on Wikipedia is subject to vandalism, but that's not really a reason to restrict anything. "The third shows only whole integers"...which is the way that record high & low temperatures are recorded in the first place.
I basically agree that the other graph located above the weather table in the Buffalo article isn't really necessary, but it does jive very well with a similiar graph that's available for plotting here by using the Buffalo Niagrara, NY site & the Daily/monthly normals "Product". Guy1890 (talk) 00:33, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
Right, OK, got it, thanks, I had missed that. Everything all Sir Garnet, concern withdrawn, thanks and sorry. Herostratus (talk) 00:33, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "NowData – NOAA Online Weather Data". National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Retrieved 2011-12-22.
  2. ^ "WMO Climate Normals for Buffalo/Greater Buffalo, NY 1961–1990". National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Retrieved December 10, 2013.
  3. ^ "Monthly Averages for Buffalo, NY". The Weather Channel. Retrieved 2010-12-19.

Structure

Hi. I'm going through all the US Cities (as per List of United States cities by population) in an effort to provide some uniformity in structure. Anyone have an issue with me restructuring this article as per Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/US Guideline. I won't be changing any content, merely the order. Occasionally, I will also move a picture just to clean up spacing issues. I've already gone through the top 20 or so on the above list, if you'd like to see how they turned out. Thoughts? Onel5969 (talk) 19:55, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Wiki away. This sounds like a useful project, and thank you. Herostratus (talk) 21:46, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
It would be a more productive use of time to write some original content — a new article or well sourced addition to an old one. GeorgeLouis (talk) 23:25, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
@GeorgeLouis: Thanks... have done both of those things as well... Onel5969 (talk) 23:53, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Media

Info about historic or long standing independent newspapers even if they do not have articles about them should be covered. I am thinking in particular about the Riverside Review which covers the northwest area of Buffalo and has had only two owners in its more than 50 years of existence.1archie99 (talk) 17:55, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Guidelines conformation

In an attempt to help get this article to the level of Good article or better status, over the next week or two I'll be working to restructure it to conform with Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/US Guideline. Much of this will include simplifying the article, removing subheadings and lists and creating related articles that will act as umbrellas to the former subheadings. In essence, by cutting, pasting and slightly modifying the content to these pages, most everything will remain intact. However the main page will be stripped down a bit. Dekema2 (talk) 06:27, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Good article nomination

I think it's time for this article to be nominated for Good article review. References to questionable content have been addressed, and for the most part the article follows WikiProject U.S. Cities guidelines. This is in part to help out the Good Article Cup. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dekema2 (talk • contribs) 03:07, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Article failed from a lack of reliable inline citations. Perhaps a thorough review and long-term cleanup of sources could help.

Unfortunately, one issue I've just noticed is many citations make frequent use of the Wayback Machine which should never be used.Dekema2 (talk) 07:35, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Wayback machine

Why are so many references within the Wayback Machine? Dekema2 (talk) 02:27, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

The Wayback machine prevents link rot. Eventually, most weblinks go away (the infamous 404 message). The Wayback Machine prevents that. I never add a reference without an archive url, unless it is prevented. Oh, btw... am enjoying what you're doing with the article.Onel5969 (talk) 03:21, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the compliments. I understand the reasoning behind the link rot, but as part of the issue with unreliable references, the article would still qualify as B-class. I think it would be best if it was added as a comment rather than a primary source. Also, another project that has to be done is getting more reliable references as apparently many in the article are not verifiable. --Dekema2 (talk) 19:23, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Location in county vector image

If I have time I will attempt to create an image in the info box with Buffalo's location in Erie County. --Dekema2 (talk) 03:54, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Update 29 March 2015: I am in the process of learning how to use Inkscape and creating a county map for Erie County right now with the help of User:Rcsprinter123. Buffaboy (talk) 04:56, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
Took a painstaking nonstop 8 hours but it's finished. Buffaboy (talk) 05:43, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

multiple issues....

The article is tagged for multiple issues -- some of the refs are unreliable, and it needs more. I'm not sure that the article needs to be tagged, in the great scheme of things, but an editor wants to, so let's see about this.

As far as "his article needs additional citations for verification", there are 181 refs and almost every paragraph has an inline citation. Of the paragraphs that don't have inline citations some are like this:

Buffalo is located on the eastern end of Lake Erie, opposite Fort Erie, Ontario, and at the beginning of the Niagara River, which flows northward over Niagara Falls and into Lake Ontario. The city is 50 miles south-southeast from Toronto. Buffalo's position on Lake Erie, facing westward, makes it one of the only major cities on the East Coast to have sunsets over a body of water.

Some of this is in sky-blue-territory and some of it should be pretty easy to ascertain if its true or not -- either the city is is 50 miles south-southeast of Toronto or its not, and so on. If this is disputed let's tag the disputed statements but I don't see the need to tag the whole article.

As to unreliability, can we start to tag those with {{Verify credibility}} and {{Better source}} (or whatever) and start to root those out. Tagging the individual refs that are not acceptable (and then waiting a while, and if not addressed then removing them and, if appropriate, the material they support) is a lot more useful that just a general tag on the whole article. Herostratus (talk) 13:12, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

  • I still count 49 paragraphs without any citations. Even the one that you mention above as Sky-WP:BLUE territory shjould probably have some citations. 50 miles south-southeast of Toronto needs to be states "as the crow flies" because it is a much longer drive than that. The article has a long way to go before we can consider removing the ref tags.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:06, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
    • Fine, but paragraph-specific or section specific tags are a lot more useful. I added some, some more could be added. As an editor, I also have very little to work with with a article-wide (on a long article, on an article with 180+ refs) proclamation that "some" of the refs are of insufficient quality. Which ones, plz? Herostratus (talk) 00:35, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

I don't have time to read all of this right now, but I would work on this article more if I didn't have to work on college assignments. --Buffaboy (formerly Dekema2) (talk) 20:51, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment in Spring 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kabdelnoor.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:23, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Update

I regret not finishing the peer review from last year, but I have been busy with schoolwork. I would like to help clean up this article at some point but will need to find time.

In the meantime I am working on a brand new template for the current Buffalo, New York one. You can view it in my sandbox. --Buffaboy (talk) 03:57, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Project

This article is easily capable of becoming a GA easily if not FA. This will be my summer project. If Utica, New York can have over 200 WP:RS, then Buffalo, with all of its history and a multitude of sources available, can easily meet that number and then some. Please help out if you can! Buffaboy talk 18:17, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

I think I'm going to get started on this. The end result will look something like Utica, New York. I will be bold with this and spend weeks, maybe months perfecting this article. It will be a monumental challenge but when I have spare time I will try my hand at it. Buffaboy talk 03:07, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
I appreciate the work you are putting in to this article. I have to take some issue with your actions here, however, where you wholesale removed a number of citations and replaced them with {{citation needed}}. I agree some of those sources are weak w/r/t WP:RS, but I would suggest that it would be better to leave the sources, and add a {{better source}} template to indicate that they need improvement. (Bizarrely, you did remove one source and added a 'better source' template in its place, which makes no sense to someone browsing the page and not following its history.) By leaving the weak sources, those interested in improvement are given more details to help them locate better citations, and the article doesn't look like a 'citation needed' wasteland. These were good faith additions and could be almost certainly be verified with better sources; removing the weak sources completely only makes that harder to do. Thanks for the consideration and keep up the good work! Antepenultimate (talk) 02:15, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
O.K, glad I'm seeing this now. Normally, I would replace the unreliable source with a reliable one on the spot, but time constraint prevent me from doing this. My plan was to either put an old revision up side by side with the newer one just to get a glance of what is being discussd in the article, and then I would go find new sources to put in. I added the better source template because I realized I should've done it with all of them, but since I'm multitasking I didn't think to do it for the other ones. In the future I will use {{better source}} in a scenario like this. Buffaboy talk 02:32, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Cool. The benefit of appending a 'better source' tag when you're pressed for time is that those of us that are watching this page might just be able to get a few sources replaced in the meantime, perhaps saving you the trouble! Thanks again - Antepenultimate (talk) 02:49, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
You're welcome, and this makes sense for a higher-traffic (or any article) article like this, because when I was editing the Utica article, there were only a few content-edits per month, so I could afford to get away with a tactic like that. Buffaboy talk 02:54, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Also, I think I should explain my gameplan with this article. I intend to strip it down by removing trivial content, and then move content that could belong in a separate article to that respective article, as I've done with Transportation in Buffalo, New York. After the article is stripped down to the basics (almost like this revision of Utica), then I will slowly add on to what is there based upon reliable sources and going on a "scavenger hunt" to find information. It could be described as throwing the baby out with the bathwater, but I don't see it that way. Buffaboy talk 02:59, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Buffalo, New York. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • 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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:24, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Checked, and found to be an archived 404 page, no earlier archived versions available. Link is still dead. Antepenultimate (talk) 12:52, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Montage

Since the montage is a collection of permission-less photos, I decided to temporarily take it down and replace it with a clean {{Photomontage}} template. Buffaboy talk 02:57, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

You might want to modify the caption to reflect the new image that you're using. Shinerunner (talk) 11:38, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
Good idea Buffaboy talk 21:22, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Buffalo, New York. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:20, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Racial composition table

The table of racial composition shows over 38% black yet the table of largest ancestries does not mention them. Similar situation for Hispanics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.9.205.245 (talk) 20:22, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

There's no reason that it should. It's only the largest ancestry groups. It adds up to 42.8. It doesn't attempt to account for the origins of everyone in the city. Flyte35 (talk) 23:52, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

That sure is a lot of people to just write it off as: "Well, we aren't accounting for every single person". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.224.179.29 (talk) 02:07, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Proposed template modifications

Hello, I've made some proposals regarding some re-organization of the {{City of Buffalo, New York}} template over at that template's talk page; recognizing that fewer people watch templates than this article, I'd invite anyone watching here to comment there if they so desire. Thanks! Antepenultimate (talk) 19:30, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Buffalo, New York. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 09:43, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

reconstruction

This summer I am planning to give a crack at this article again and turn it into a GA, then an FA. Anyone who would like to help, please do and provide suggestions. I helped Utica, New York out from what it used to be, now it is time to redo this one from top to bottom. I started but couldn't get anywhere. Buffaboy talk 22:45, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Looks to me like it's already fine, maybe that's why it's hard to improve? In view of how bleak is the subject why should it be fluffed more than this? Rocked at turn of 20th century, sucks now, if you got that you've got the essence of it. 98.4.124.117 (talk) 01:35, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Buffalo, New York. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After 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 these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 13:23, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Buffalo, New York. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After 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 these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 06:20, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Rfc regarding article content

Are older sources reliable for a city article? Where can I look outside of the Internet Archive?

Buffaboy talk 09:44, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

It's been awhile since I've attempted to put a lot of effort into city articles such as Utica, New York. I believe I have a plan for this article. My concern is that the sources that are free tend to be published around the early 1900s and earlier. Does this affect WP:RS, as there is a policy that newer sources are preferred to old? Would the Resouce Request Wikipeoject be of any help with this article content?

Also, I feel as though no matter how much I personallly know about the subject, or what various books tell me, information about this subject will be omitted by overlooking it, or downplaying its importance. How can I ensure the article is comprehensive? I am trying to use the other US FA cities as a model, but because most of these were promoted over 10 years ago, all in 2007, the criteria may have changesd.

Buffaboy talk 09:49, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

When covering the very early history of many regions, it's easier to find older sources that do so well. In Ontario, Canada, for example, several "gazeteers" published in the 1800s are readily available on-line. I found them with a Google Books search. I used those often in the History section of towns and cities. See example below.
 By 1851, the village itself had a flour mill owned by Benjamin D. Snyder, a hotel, a blacksmith, a general store and a cooperage.{{cite book | title = County of Waterloo Gazetteer and General Business Directory, For 1864 | publisher = Mitchell & Co. | year = 1864 | url = http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/001075/f2/e010780571_p3.pdf | pages = 184} The first post office opened in 1852, called St. Jacobs, with Joseph Eby as postmaster and the village was incorporated in that year. By 1855, the population was 400 and by then, there were four hotels, including Benjamins which still stands; it was later known as the Dominion Hotel. In 1871, E.W.B. Snider bought the flour mill and promoted hydro electricity and other milling operations. The river helped power mills and a woolen factory and a tannery; by then, the school had 66 students. There was only a single church, (Evangelical Association) built in 1850.County of Waterloo Gazetteer and General Business Directory, For 1864 (PDF). Mitchell & Co. 1864. p. 184.
Here is a search for Buffalo history on Google Books; you will probably find several useful sources. It is more time consuming than searching Web sites but should contain info not available on the Internet: https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&q=history%2C+buffalo%2C+new+york My search term was just History ... you could try a more specific search such as History, Churches ... Peter K Burian (talk) 13:28, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
Good ideas, thanks a lot. Buffaboy talk 16:31, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

This article seems useful too. http://www.buffaloah.com/a/landmks/wvillage/ gives thans to the City of Buffalo Preservation Board for their assistance.

See https://www.city-buffalo.com/Home/City_Departments/Office_of_Strategic_Planning/RegulatoryBoards/Preservation_Board/HistoricResourcesIntensiveLevelSurvey

Peter K Burian (talk) 20:15, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

One site I use for older newpaper articles is Fulton History.com [1] if you open the articles you find in the search window in a new tab you'll end up with a link that takes you to that page. The only downside is that the url's tend to be long. Another site is New York State historic newspaper [2] and both sites are free to use. Shinerunner (talk) 22:37, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

A long URL is not a problem because the reader just sees the little blue footnote number. I would never worry about that if I found a useful/reliable site. I have edited the Wikipedia article for many towns; those are easier to do than a big city like Buffalo. But worth it once it's done. Peter K Burian (talk) 01:52, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

The reason I mentioned the URL length is that it can sometimes make editing a page a bit more difficult and it might give a false sense that the article is too long when in reality the visible text of the article is much shorter. Personally, I'd rather have the good citable source and not worry about those things.Shinerunner (talk) 10:09, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

btw, @User:Buffaboy, the Utica, New York article is excellent. If you can get Buffalo, New York up to that standard, it would be an achievement. I live in Ontario, Canada, so am more interested in editing cities and towns in my area. Admittedly, I have not brought those articles up to the same standard as Utica, but they are much better than they were previously. If I had found a couple of other editors serious about those topics, those articles could be excellent too. Hard to do it all myself. Like the Climate section is one I never manage to do. Peter K Burian (talk) 20:02, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the input, that's the goal. I think I can actually outdo the Utica article as well, that;'s the bare minimum for me. Getting this to WP:GA or WP:FA is a challenge when you take into account all of the literature out there. For a city this big, there's too much information to survey. Buffaboy talk 21:45, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
Also @SounderBruce:, per this FA-review I am worried that the 19th-century books I'm using are too old for the article. Or does it matter that much? I'd hate having to go back to redo references. Buffaboy talk 09:38, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
The issue raised in the FA review was mostly about the book being a compilation of stories from local residents, rather than works by historians. As long as your 19th century books are written by historians or professionals, I think it will pass source review. It would be good to look at modern books by historians, even if they cite the same books, and add them as supplements. SounderBruce 02:40, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
  • SounderBruce Good to know, I'm thinking a lot of the books are from the historical society. Either way, many of the authors seem to have forewords boasting about the book and the city, so that would be a good place for me to check. Buffaboy talk 07:51, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Article expansion

I am planning to do major work on this article in the coming months. I will be picking up where I left off last year. The eventual goal is to get it to GA or FA status. If anyone wants to share ideas please do. --Buffaboy talk 21:39, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Crime merge

I'm proposing merging the Crime section with Law and government. The crime section itself is only three sentences and far smaller than any other sections. BT9988 (talk) 20:23, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

general

hi — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2401:4900:36A1:B7AF:14DA:8F90:99A7:E349 (talk) 17:43, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Buffalo,_New_York/Archive_4&oldid=1175709627"