Talk:Cities in the Great Depression

Political Bias

The article as of June 8th 2010 appears to have been edited from a right-wing/neocon perspective, particularly in its assessment of private-sector economic stimulation in the UK versus the USA, and in analysis of the popularity of FDR. The source for former assertion has been selectively cited (there are several analysis of this issue, as can been seen in the main great Depression article_, and no source or reference for the FDR assertion has been given.

The article is in urgent need of attention from someone knowledgable and neutral. Information unsupported by references will be removed Plutonium27 (talk) 06:28, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quite selfish views

It seems the World was USA & Canada... not a word about the rest of the world. Shame. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dagofloreswi (talk • contribs) 00:33, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV

I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:

This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:

There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:34, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 4 May 2019

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved per consensus (non-admin closure) Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ _Talk 21:35, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A better wording if the title in my opinion. The current title almost makes it sounds like some sort of region or something. jackchango talk 18:59, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Negative "effects" is so vague no one will be searching for it. The current title is better and more general. The main topic is actually the people in the cities and how they responded to a long economic crisis. Substitute adds nothing and emphasize "effects" rather than "cities" -- we want to attract readers looking for urban history, a very specific field of study. Rjensen (talk) 19:21, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose (negative) Although it could be an exception, the new tiles does not seem to be Wikipedia:CONCISE (both titles could be "precise and unambiguous"). I might be willing to change my argument if the new title was shorter. OkayKenji (talk) 21:28, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Canada is not a city

It's weird seeing Canada in a list with London and Berlin 75.157.250.44 (talk) 04:15, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]