Jump to content

Talk:Detroit/Archive 8

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 19 external links on Detroit. 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.

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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:29, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 6 external links on Detroit. 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.

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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:14, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

History section

The last few sections of the History section seem a bit all over the place. There is a section re Detroit's decline, then a section re all the downtown development creating a renaissance in the 1990-2000 timeframe, and then a section re bankruptcy. The section re 1990s-2000s development seems a bit too cheery, and glosses over Detroit's serious ongoing structural problems. The 1990-2000 section should be completely rewritten. I'll leave it up to others who are experts on Detroit. CUA 27 (talk) 14:58, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

WP:BRD?

User:Rmhermen — I noticed that you did what appears to be a large revert of a number of recent changes I had made to the Demographics section. The section had become quite bloated, which is why I was moving some items to the related Demographics of Metro Detroit and Demographic history of Detroit articles. I am interested in your thoughts. CUA 27 (talk) 22:27, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

You took a large chunk of Black history out of the section, removing all historical context - but left intact all the other (and in Detroit, minor) ethnic information. And I don't think the short section was too long. Rmhermen (talk) 16:50, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
@Rmhermen: Your description of my edits bears little resemblance to the edits I made. The Great Migration is discussed twice in the article — once in the History section and once in the Demographics section. The text I removed is duplicative. I don't think we need to turn the Demographics section (other any other section for that matter) into a mini history section that repeats the main History section. CUA 27 (talk) 02:00, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
Furthermore, the Demographics section contains two identical maps. CUA 27 (talk) 01:17, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

8 Mile / 8 Mile (film) Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:8 Mile (film) In ictu oculi (talk) 19:11, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Wayne County map in infobox

The map of Wayne County in the infobox is inaccurate; for some reason the Grosse Pointes are "stretched out" to look much larger than they actually are. 2602:306:CFEA:170:1CC1:259F:AEF4:BC01 (talk) 20:42, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

The map data come from the census bureau so are unlikely to be incorrect. Rmhermen (talk) 23:18, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Detroit. 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}}).

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) 19:32, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 18 external links on Detroit. 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}}).

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) 20:45, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 December 2016

detorit Megatrump (talk) 16:36, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 16:59, 20 December 2016 (UTC).

Detroiters?

How necessary is the redirect here? The phrase doesn't occur in the main article space a single time, only embedded in a ref's title once. The show Detroiters (TV series) could take the place of wiki/Detroiters rather than the article on the city. Not going to instigate a redirect deletion or a move without consensus. JesseRafe (talk) 22:23, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 19 external links on Detroit. 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) 06:49, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Detroit. 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) 03:28, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Detroit. 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) 08:23, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

From the Lead

Following the shift of population and jobs to its suburbs, other states or nations, the city has focused on becoming the metropolitan region's economic and cultural center.

What does that mean???--Jack Upland (talk) 02:29, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
Nothing? At least that is what it sounds like to me. Is there referenced copy elsewhere in the article pertaining to that? Because the lede is supposed to be a summary of the article. John from Idegon (talk) 03:25, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure what it means either. The days of car manufacturing and Motown are in the past. In recent history, the city of Detroit has been a prime example of urban decay, blight, crime, and dysfunction. While these issues are referenced, they are marginalized and not properly addressed. This entire article has a very "rose-tinted" view of the city which borders on propaganda. The fact is, Detroit is one of the worst cities in this country by several metrics (murder rate, unemployment, abandoned property, quality of public services, etc.) This article will not be good enough until it addresses the other side of the story. Bigdan201 (talk) 20:47, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
@Bigdan201: It may be good to get sources as close to 2017 as well so it reflects the current status/viewpoints of the city. Even those from 10 years ago are valuable, though. I am aware that this was an issue in the FAR in which the article was demoted: Wikipedia:Featured article review/Detroit/archive1 - Also see Talk:Detroit/Archive_6 WhisperToMe (talk) 14:39, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Other unclear (politically correct?) language: 

"...tension between Young and his suburban counterparts over regional matters was problematic throughout his mayoral term."

How can tension be problematic? I guess they simply quarreled and fought one another. Zezen (talk) 16:37, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Detroit. 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) 14:25, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Update

Probably overdue to mention Mike Duggan in the text? He's only even mentioned in infoboxes and the caption of his photo, as far as I can see. Andrewa (talk) 05:07, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

did they use magic?

"The plan allowed the city to eliminate $7 billion in debt and invest $1.7 billion into improved city services." How was the debt eliminated?67.209.129.36 (talk) 04:17, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Verification tag

The verifiablity tag has been sitting on top of this article for over 6 months (as of January 2020), but there are no individual tags throughout the article to address where the information needing verified is located. The article is decently written and contains an incredible amount of sources, so I'm not sure why the entire article needs the ominous tag at the top. There may be information within the article that is of suspicious authenticity or importance, but it doesn't appear to be noted or have been discussed at all. I would like to know what specific information within the article needs verification (or removal); otherwise, it might be boldly possible to invoke When to Remove #7 to remove the tag if a discussion isn't facilitated to remedy the problem. Detroit was once a featured article, and tags like this (with no active discussion) aren't very helpful for this otherwise important article, especially if problems do exist. —Notorious4life (talk) 20:19, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

NPOV problems

> “Proving their persistent prejudice and unwillingness to integrate, many white families with the financial ability moved to the suburbs of Detroit taking their jobs and tax dollars with them.”

This needs much sourcing. E.g., was the flight away from incoming blacks, or to better schools? (I don’t know, but I do know that it needs proper sourcing.) Or was there the usual amount of population out-movement (some fraction every year), and the change was a shortage of in-movement? (Again, I don’t know, but if this was the cause then the problem was not the prejudice of the current inhabitants, instead it could have been the prejudice of those choosing not to move to Detroit.)

And the tone is nasty: attaching the idea of prejudice (bad) to the idea that if somebody moves they take their tax dollars with them (which would be true whether moving into or out of Detroit).

I have no expertise about Detroit, but this does not read as if WP:NPOV compliant. JDAWiseman (talk) 18:11, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

New navbox: Great Lakes Megalopolis

User:Jhenderson777 added a navbox today called Great Lakes Megalopolis. This editor created the navbox and has been adding it to many, many articles. The Great Lakes Megalopolis is a "concept" put forward in a little-known book from 1961, and per WP:NAV-WITHIN and WP:NENAN, I doubt the navbox will be of benefit to the readers of this article. The input of other would be appreciated. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:01, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

I will see if I can remove that many cities that aren't listed any more. this is a weird place to discuss though. Why not put the navbox in templates for discussion or something. Anyway the navbox is different now. You do realize the template cites not the book but (it is even clear on that) but what Megaregions of the United States commonly cites. I think you do but you failed to mention that I mentioned it to you so you could make a consensus on your case. Jhenderson 777 23:09, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

After reading Great Lakes Megalopolis and doing some googling, I just don’t think the region is well known enough to justify a template. Most of the references in the article call it a “proposed” or “emergent” region aka WP:NOTACRYSTALBALL. The article needs a complete rewrite to comply with our quality standards; the current sources barely demonstrate it meets WP:GNG, although I’m sure some could be found. And then there is the template itself, this is clearly too broad a topic, articles are too loosely connected, and the region itself is too loosely defined. Nearly a third of the United States population is included here. Folks in Overland Park, Kansas are on the Great Plains and would be quite surprised to hear they live in a Great Lakes Megalopolis. It’s an unnecessary addition to an already overcrowded navbox landscape. Grey Wanderer (talk) 23:28, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

I should note that cities like that are removed though. It just focuses on the metros and no suburbs. We already had consensus on the two of you against me in my discussion page. The OP editor just tagged the editor on my discussion page to here. No bad faith assumed though! :) Jhenderson 777 23:35, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Magnolia677 and Jhenderson777, I think this discussion is best carried on at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 July 31#Template:Great Lakes Megalopolis, we have a better shot at attracting knowledgeable navbox editors there. Grey Wanderer (talk) 23:55, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Yes I saw it..and thank you for putting the discussion in right place. :) Jhenderson 777 23:57, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Alleged racism of section

User User:67.209.88.156 (Special:Contributions/67.209.88.156) says that an entire section in this article is entirely racist, and it should be removed. I invite them to discuss why they believe this, to avoid an edit war. WhoAteMyButter (📬│✏️) 05:31, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

I'd like to pop-in and say I disagree with User:67.209.88.156's assertions of racism in this article. R. J. Dockery (talk) 21:35, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Infobox collage

I see this article is already tagged with the too many images cleanup banner, which at a brief glance looks valid, but the number of images in the infobox collage warrants a particular callout, given that it's far far more than at most city pages. Could some editors more familiar with Detroit please try pruning the less relevant images, and converting to {{Multiple image}} while they're at it? {{u|Sdkb}} talk 08:43, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Done, although I'm not exactly familiar with Detroit.. if any other editors want to amend the montage, feel free to do so. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 16:33, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

@GuyFulton: When I say any editors are welcome to amend the montage, I mean that anybody can provide suggestions to what might be the most important features of the city to showcase, since I'm not from Michigan. That doesn't mean the montage should consist of multiple images of the same feature, especially when you could barely see what's in the image. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 23:11, 11 January 2021 (UTC) @Nkon21: Your argument is completely baseless. I recommend you to take a look at the Wiki page of the city of Seattle, a "FEATURED" article with three of its four infobox images being aerial photos, and you're telling me that having more than one is problematic.GuyFulton (talk) 23:58, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

  • I think numerous aerial photos in a collage is redundant and doesn't serve a purpose to represent the most notable features of a city. The skyline photo and this aerial photo are useful. It is debatable what might be the most notable features of the city that even an outsider would easily recognize; the Ambassador Bridge certainly is one of them. With those three pictures, I'm not too keen on the middle pictures being the Eastern Market or Woodward Avenue. I like this Greektown photo and perhaps a residential neighborhood photo or other historic landmark, but otherwise the current 5-picture collage in place is better than any one in the past. The article itself has a ton of probably useless photos sandwiched in that need discussed, but that's my opinion on the infobox collage. —Notorious4life (talk) 00:37, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Infobox county location map

Another user, Cookieman1.1.1, and I have different opinions on which image should be included as the "Location within Wayne County" map used in the main infobox. While the discussion concerns only some of the Wayne County municipality maps, I brought it to the Detroit page to perhaps reach a larger viewership. The two different maps called into question are the other user's image (left) and my image (right). Of course, I advocate for the style on the right, but because of another user's opinions and to avoid back-and-forth reverts, I believe a consensus must be reached.

Cookieman1.1.1 SVG image
Notorious4life PNG image
Cookieman1.1.1 SVG image (left) and Notorious4life PNG image (right)

The image on the left that I am opposing is not bad, and I am not debating the SVG versus PNG format. The SVG image contains some imperfections and lack of detail for some municipalities. The lack of detail comes from the rounding of some boundaries, which are not precisely drawn according to the 2010 census (page E-18 Michigan), such as for Belleville, Garden City, Northville, and Plymouth. The most stark inaccuracy is the shading of Redford Township, which is not incorporated and should not be shaded like the other cities. Additionally, the merging of land and water boundaries does not accurately show the size of the city. Particularly, it makes the waterfront Grosse Pointe cities look much larger than they really are, as well as not distinguishing Grosse Ile Township as islands. The SVG image makes it appear like there is actually nothing where Grosse Ile Township is supposed to be with a random line going through the blank space to note the township's water boundary with Brownstown Township.

This same discussion also applies for the following cities, where similar maps have been debated in the main infobox: Dearborn Heights, Inkster, and Taylor.

Also, unrelated to the above discussion, I don't think the Detroit pushpin map should have a "yes" for its relief, as the city is not a geological feature and might be best shown with its red dot on a non-relief map. —Notorious4life (talk) 22:00, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

This is not even a debate, as far as I'm concerned. Your map is much better. --Criticalthinker (talk) 06:49, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Agreed. Conflating land and water area is confusing and non-standard. Andrew Jameson (talk) 22:28, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
@Notorious4life: The Grosses have been fixed. --Cookieman1.1.1 (talk) 14:42, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:57, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Crime section

I made Crime its own section instead of a subsection of Demographics, since demography is the study of populations, and the crime section is not. I also moved it further down the article, between media and infrastructure. However, there might be a better place for it.

Given that the crime section also talks about police, should the section be renames "Police and Crime" and moved to the Government section? Sativa Inflorescence (talk) 16:16, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Demographic loss

This article makes special note of the dramatic loss of population of Detroit. But some other cities have had comparable or greater loss: St. Louis: peak: 1950: 856,796; 2020: 301,578 That city in the 1970s had a greater % loss than any decade in Detroit's history. Youngstown: peak: 1930: 170,002; 2020: 60,068 Gary, Indiana: peak: 1960: 178,320, 2020: 69,093 Flint, Michigan: peak: 1960: 196,940, 2020: 81,252. Consideration of wider context needed. Dogru144 (talk) 20:58, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Detroit does seem to have the largest overall drop, only looking at the number differences. The % also seems slightly higher than the population drops in these other cities. If you have the % loss that St. Louis had in the 1970s, maybe we could add that to the article? 23impartial (talk) 13:42, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: This is America

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 11 September 2023 and 18 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Spreadinglove444 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Spreadinglove444 (talk) 22:14, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Detroit/Archive_8&oldid=1255951235"