Jump to content

Talk:Fargo, North Dakota

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Radisson image

[edit]

I have concerns over using the picture of the Radisson Hotel in the Fargo infobox. The infobox picture is supposed to either be an image of a city's skyline or of a notable landmark or vista. I'm not sure how a picture of a hotel fulfills that. Also, the Radisson picture has no copyright information and appears to have come from this website. --MatthewUND(talk) 02:32, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I will remove it for the reasons you have stated. Additionally there appears to be a watermark on it. --Ndstate 21:44, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I just added a pic of the Fargo Theater. That pic also does not show the skyline, but it is probably a more familiar symbol of Fargo than the Radisson. I'm going to keep looking for a skyline pic. --MatthewUND(talk) 23:25, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Where did that pic go? I think it would be better for the main info box pic, then the one that is currently there. --Ndstate 03:52, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You mean you liked the Fargo Theater pic better than these "skyline" pics this other user has been putting up? Me too. These other pics have questionable licensing status and aren't that great really. The first one showed the downtown skyline during a flood...rather odd. This last one is mainly showing the senior citizen high-rise. I think I'll go ahead and put back the Fargo Theater pic for now. It would be nice to find a skyline pic of some sort..or maybe a pic showing Broadway downtown...that would be nice. --MatthewUND(talk) 04:01, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you. --Ndstate 18:46, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

animal and plants

[edit]

This section just seems silly, so i removed it, anyone agree/disagree? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.161.109.226 (talk) 16:20, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures of Fargo

[edit]

I understand that people want to post flattering pictures of Fargo, but I find it curious that the three pictures of Fargo show plenty of trees and sun. This can be extremely misleading to many, as Fargo is one of the coldest cities in the lower 48. My guess is these pictures had to have been taken in either July or August, because when else could they shoot it? I'm sure Fargo's a great city, but to try to bury and flit over the fact that it's ungodly cold there is misleading. Asc85 (talk) 17:48, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm almost 100% sure (from personal experience) that if the infobox were replaced with one featuring a gray sky and mounds of dirty snow that we would immediately begin getting complaints on the talk page about the picture being too gloomy. One of the issues with articles like this is that there aren't a huge number of pictures to choose from; it's not as though there are a dozen great downtown photos and there was a deliberate attempt to pick the most tropical looking one. Also, there are several pictures in the article that look as though they were taken during winter. Another thing to remember is that although the reputation of many cities in this part of the country is of an eternally cold place, that is really only half the story. It can get very hot in North Dakota, and the spring/summer/fall season is quite a bit longer than the months of July and August. I realize that there are at times cases on Wikipedia of... let's call it "civic boosterism"... (see Detroit, which is apparently a vibrant, ritzy place to live according to the pictures in that article), but I just don't really think that that's the case with this article. AlexiusHoratius 18:34, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That said, I suppose a snowy/wintery picture for the climate section wouldn't hurt. AlexiusHoratius 18:43, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think your comments are fair, and I've long ago given up on articles where the "civic boosterism," as you say is evident. I try to cut down on excessive boosterism whenever I can, but I'd be here all day. Since I went to school in Allentown, PA, I like to look at that entry from time to time, and it's the same kind of thing you're talking about. Asc85 (talk) 12:50, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCities Importance Scale

[edit]

Just out of curiosity: Why is fargo given the designation of "low importance" when the criteria clearly states that a city is of mid importance if it has less than 200,000 people but has had "International news coverage by at least two media agencies of an event or disaster." This springs flooding was not only reported by every major new agency in the country, but also recieved international coverage by at least the bbc and the guardian. Would this not then qualify Fargo as a city of "mid" importance in the WikiCities directory? I don't know if this is the correct place to bring this up. Thanks

Sstoy (talk) 17:18, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed this per the guidelines. --NDState 17:35, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Midcontinent Communications reference

[edit]

Midcontinent Communications does not offer any service inside Fargo city limits. They're in Moorhead, West Fargo, and most of the other small towns surrounding Fargo, but not in Fargo proper. (My understanding is that the City of Fargo has been blocking their requests to operate here for years.) Accordingly, I removed the mention of Midco as a cable TV provider. Any objections? --Lukeonia1 (talk) 05:12, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fargo is a new city. It was found in 1999 by Will Cater — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.228.209.229 (talk) 00:46, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Timeline of Fargo, North Dakota

[edit]

What is missing from the recently created city timeline article? Please add relevant content. Contributions welcome. Thank you. -- M2545 (talk) 14:52, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@M2545: This article says that Fargo was originally call'd Centralia but later the name was changed to Fargo. When did that happen? I don't know -- it was call'd Fargo when I lived there! Eric Kvaalen (talk) 20:11, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Missing content

[edit]

The History section jumps to the "Early history" that, according to the article, begins in the 1870's. This is listed as a "B-class" article so one would expect to find some actual early history of any settlements and military posts, that would include outposts, in "earlier" history. Otr500 (talk) 15:19, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

K-12 Lack of clarity

[edit]

The term K-12 is an unfamiliar one for many readers, particularly those who are from outside the USA. Does it mean Kids to age 12? Or Kindergarten to age 12? Or is it a reference to grades? None of this is clear. The heading should be changed to clarify and comprehensible to readers who are not familiar with US educational terms. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Isoron27000 (talk • contribs) 11:54, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. I've changed it to "Primary and Secondary schools". Cliff (talk) 14:59, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Fargo, North Dakota. 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) 20:43, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Fargo, North Dakota. 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) 21:56, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Fargo, North Dakota. 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) 10:05, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox image

[edit]
Image added and photographed by User:WeaponizingArchitecture
Photo removed by WeaponizingArchitecture

User:WeaponizingArchitecture has reverted an edit in order to re-insert their own photo in the infobox. My concern is that WeaponizingArchitecture's photo of the top of three buildings, some cranes, and lots of sky, is not the highest quality image for the infobox, per MOS:IMAGEQUALITY. The input of others would be appreciated. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:25, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My main problem with the removed photo is that it isn't very representative of the city itself. It gives a very limited view of Downtown Fargo, only showing like 1 block. WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me 19:51, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree the removed photo is better for the infobox. It seems to show more of the historic core of the city which I prefer and is better quality. The other article could be used elsewhere in the article. MB 00:20, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
My problem is that the image i took is basically the only decent skyline photo on commons that shows the city's buildings (the original photo was a very low quality view of the whole city from a decade ago). The removed photo isn't that representative; there is a lot more of downtown to the south of the removed photo, so trying to claim that what is shown in the removed photo is all of the "Historic Core" is a bit disingenuous, intentional or not. Even if it wasn't, Most cities have a *skyline* picture in it that doesn't neccesarily show the historic core of said city, but rather what the city looks like from say a river or mountain.
Speaking of which, the parking garage I took my photo at was realistically the only place I could get a good photo from. The only other spot was closed due to construction. I don't have a drone, so I usually rely off of various locations in order to get a good angle.
Sorry for the word soup, I just wanted to give my thoughts. WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me 00:36, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The skyline picture is more representative of the city itself. The other image is fine and should be used in the body, but it doesn't represent much of Fargo itself, it seems. Cessaune (talk) 01:00, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RfC on Infobox Image

[edit]
There is a strong consensus that the original photo (2018) is superior and should not be replaced by the proposed one (2022). The vast majority of editors view the original as being more pleasing to the eye and being a superior visual aid to represent Fargo, with some citing MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE. Common complaints about the proposed image was that it had too much sky in it, has unappealing elements, and showcases a skyline that many editors view as being insignificant. There was some discussion that both images could be introduced in the infobox, but this did not garner significant support or opposition. Therefore, there is no consensus to introduce the proposed image along with the original in the infobox. Perhaps this could be discussed further in a future discussion. (non-admin closure) Iamreallygoodatcheckerst@lk 16:30, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Which photo should be used for the infobox of this article?

  • File:Fargo, North_Dakota (2022).jpg
    File:Fargo, North_Dakota (2022).jpg
  • File:Fargo, North_Dakota (2018).jpg
    File:Fargo, North_Dakota (2018).jpg

WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me 15:19, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Original photo. From a strictly aesthetic perspective, the original photo is superior (my opinion obviously). It actually shows streets, sidewalks, and buildings, which are full of color. The trees in the background offer a good urban/nature complement and a color complement, the red brick with the green trees. And beyond the trees you can see further structures, including a very interesting water tower. It's a full picture. There's a lot to look at, and there's diversity. The skyline picture is just that, a skyline, if you can even call it that. I mean, come on, this is Fargo. I don't mean to be insulting; most of the best cities have unimpressive skylines. In any case, the skyline picture is mostly sky, i.e., not the city. The buildings are gray and blue and look cold. And there's a crane and a parking garage. If we're talking about representation, I don't see how that picture represents Fargo or helps me understand what the city looks like. It's a handful of unattractive buildings. It's a very uninviting picture. The original picture is quite nice. Scapulus (talk) 23:00, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Except the problem is that the infobox image isnt mean't to show off aesthetics, it's called an infobox for a reason. That would be like if I just put a picture of Broadway Street as the main photo in Detroit's article, excluding the actual skyline of the city. A skyline photo on an infobox isn't supposed to look nice, its supposed to be informative. WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me 14:28, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay, well, the skyline picture is itself extremely uninformative. All it tells me is that there is like three or four somewhat tall buildings in the city, and they're not unique to the city in any way. Skyline pictures make sense for cities that actually have skylines. Sorry, but Fargo doesn't. The original picture actually shows part of the city. A skyline picture would only make sense if it had a greater scope. So unless someone with a drone can get a nice wide shot that encompasses more of the city (and has less sky), I don't see any point in using a skyline picture. Scapulus (talk) 17:35, 20 January 2023
    This still boils down to "i think it looks prettier". Also yes, fargo does have a skyline. Those buildings are literally right in downtown. Also, the 2018 photo only shows like 2 blocks of the entire downtown area. Its not that helpful for the main photo. WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me 08:04, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It's not simply about prettiness, though when it comes down to it, yes, the photo you took is unappealing. And that's no fault to you. You tried to take a picture of Fargo's "skyline" while standing on top of a parking garage. That's a challenge. I wouldn't fair any better. Your disfavor with the original photo seems to boil down to the fact that it fails to show the entirety of the city. But at least it shows some of the city. Your photo shows none of the city, except the tops of a few buildings. It's less of a representation than the original photo. Sorry, but skylines are not always the best way to visually sum up a city. Again, if you are hell bent on using a skyline photo, I would suggest finding someone with a drone. I'm sure a wide shot from a drone would look good and represent the city really well. Scapulus (talk) 19:08, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    "Tops of a few buildings"
    This is why for larger cities, montages are important to add. Would adding the original photo into the montage be useful, Something like this? WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me 19:21, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    That doesn't look too bad. Now, I'm not a Fargoan, so my skin in the game doesn't run as deep as yours. But anyway, I think that looks fine. Perhaps there should be another discussion or RfC with the montage as an option. I'd probably vote for it, but I'd still suggest, in the meantime, working on obtaining a better shot that encompasses more of the city. As an example, the main picture on the Tucson, Arizona page (not saying it's a fantastic photo—I'm just referring to the angle and how much of downtown it shows). Scapulus (talk) 20:46, 23 January 2023
    Im not from fargo. I took this photo when i was going around the Dakotas. I might return in the future, though. WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me 05:01, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Original photo (2018 photo on right) - This image shows streets and buildings and places people interact, and is a superior illustrative aid, per MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE. The image on the left shows some buildings, a crane, and lots of sky. Magnolia677 (talk) 00:04, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Original photo (2018 photo on right). As Magnolia677 says, this image shows streets and buildings and places people interact, and is a superior illustrative aid, per MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE. The image on the left would be of any city, anywhere. Laurel Lodged (talk) 14:58, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    What do you mean "any city"? Should we just get rid of Chicago's main photo because it doesn't show the streets themselves? WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me 16:22, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Calm down. The two are not comparable. Certain cities are recognised by their profile alone. The silhouette of the Eiffel Tower is sufficient to identify Paris; no streets are needed. Not so with Fargo. Laurel Lodged (talk) 17:27, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Even if that were true, The 2018 image is only like 4 blocks. There is a lot of downtown that isn't shown in that photo.
WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me 03:05, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Original photo I personally agree with previous comments because Fargo's skyline isn't really recognizable or notable as it is the case with some other cities. However, I can also understand the opposite point of view. Iraniangal777 (talk) 08:54, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Original photo (2018 photo on right) I agree with the previous comments. I believe it shows more of the characteristics of Fargo and Fargo does not really have a skyline showcase. Grahaml35 (talk) 04:08, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Use both I agree with the previous comments however I do also believe that both photos could be used as one shows more than the other and vise versa. Most major cities anyways have a skyline photo somewhere in the infobox to begin with. I do however disagree that the edit attempted to replace the downtown image with his own work however. In the end we are looking at an infobox that has some terrible photos already to begin with. I.e the Veterans bridge could have a better image/relevancy? Overall I personally believe the article would benefit from using both images (2018 photo and 2022 photo). -- Viiticus  Loqui? 19:49, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I highly agree with this. I believe it makes sense to include both photos in the infobox. A lot of other cities do this, anyways. WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me 14:02, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
WeaponizingArchitecture, it really isn't necessary to confront so many editors who disagree with you. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:01, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Original photo The original photo gives more information about the city, at-a-glance. The other photo has too much real estate being used up by a blue sky. It does not adequately portray the imagery of Fargo, North Dakota. Pickalittletalkalittle (talk) 02:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

List of Tallest buildings seems incorrect / outdated

[edit]

Just randomly re-reading our Wiki page tonight, and came to the Sanford Medical Center stats - listed at 199ft and built in 2012 - i'm not sure what building that refers to. If is the new one completed 2017 and located at 5225 23rd Ave S - then that's listed at 274 feet tall and ALSO cites that it's only 7 feet shorter than the Fargo Radisson Hotel in downtown Fargo - which is listed at 206ft in this article. The #'s for that come from this sanford news article published in July 2018 - https://news.sanfordhealth.org/news/sanford-medical-center-fargo-stats/#:~:text=Fun%20facts%20on%20the%20facility%3A&text=274%20feet%20in%20height%20(Just,foot%20North%20Dakota%20State%20Capitol)

Based on those two things, in addtion to current remodeling going on in downtown fargo and the imminent demolition of the Lashkowitz High Rise, i'd say the list needs some attention by someone with the proper knowledge and access. Gopherboy6956 (talk) 07:09, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Fargo Air Museum to Attractions

[edit]

I am new to Wikipedia editing I wanting to add some valuable information/edits to my hometown (Fargo)'s Wiki page. I noticed under attractions there is only a few things listed. I'd like to add the 'Fargo Air Museum' to this section as this is/has been an important attraction for the people of Fargo since its opening in 2001. The museum is not simply a display area for planes, but a space for speakers, seminars, day camps and also hosts a large Aviation library. Brimelle (talk) 21:42, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is listed under Museums in the article. Cheers, 〜 Adflatuss • talk 21:50, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I hadn't seen that! Brimelle (talk) 22:17, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Adding the annual Downtown Fargo Street Fair to 'Arts and Culture' section

[edit]

The annual Downtown Fargo Street Fair of arts, crafts and food brings hundreds of vendors to the city center for one of Fargo's biggest events of the year and North Dakota’s biggest free outdoor event. Brimelle (talk) 22:22, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Needs reliable sources, personal observation is not acceptable. Cheers, 〜 Adflatuss • talk 03:10, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the prompt reply!
Would the following sources be adequate in order to contribute/ add the Downtown Fargo Street Fair? https://downtownfargo.com/events/downtown-fargo-street-fair/ https://fargond.gov/how-do-i/visiting-or-moving-to-fargo/street-fair Brimelle (talk) 18:20, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Fargo,_North_Dakota&oldid=1251560594"