Talk:Greater Houston/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Health Care industry

Does anyone else find it odd that there is no mention about the health care industry in the Houston area. Houston has the largest medical center in the world and Galveston has one of only two National Biocontainment Labs. Ben (talk) 08:15, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

The industry is mentioned in the economy section. Postoak (talk) 21:53, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Merge proposal: Galveston Bay Area

Some editors have proposed merging the Galveston Bay Area article with this one. If you with to share your thoughts please comment there.

--Mcorazao (talk) 18:29, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion: Subregions section

Taking the San Francisco Bay Area article as an example, it seems worthwhile to have a section discussing the various subregions of Greater Houston, either as a top-level section or as part of "Components of the metropolitan area". The article as it stands now does not really give a picture of what distinguishes the various parts of the metro area (i.e. it sounds like really there is Houston and then a bunch of suburbs that want to be part of Houston, which is really a big oversimplification). Things could be broken down by county but, IMHO, simply doing that is not extremely useful since there are cases where communities that are closely tied are not in the same county.

It is debatable what the right divisions to use are (anybody know of a good reference?). Maybe something along the lines of the following.

• Central Houston - Most of the area inside the Beltway, especially those areas inside Loop 610 and adjacent areas, including Downtown, Midtown, Spring Branch, River Oaks, the Heights, the East End, and other areas.
• Fort Bend - Sugarland, Rosenberg, Missouri City, and other areas.
• Bay Area / Galveston - Galveston and the communities near the bay including Pasadena, Baytown, Clear Lake, and Texas City.
• North suburbs - Spring, Conroe, The Woodlands, Humble, ...
• Northwest -
• ...

Thoughts?

--Mcorazao (talk) 17:41, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Comment - A lot of this would be duplication of existing information; many of them are poorly defined and, unlike the SFBA, lack notoriety outside of the Houston area. It might be worth looking into the creation of some of them, but its going to be difficult to find sources that were published in Third Party publications -- the gold standard for RS -- for many of them. --Nsaum75 (talk) 20:18, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Reply I'm not suggesting creating articles for these divisions (though I wouldn't oppose it either if there are motivated individuals). I'm simply suggesting that, as written, the "Components of the metropolitan area" section is not particularly informative (i.e. it serves little more than to give a researcher a starting point in terms of communities to look at). By breaking up the area into major regions and briefly mentioning what is interesting or unique about the region it gives the reader an actual perspective of why it matters that that there are distinct communities and why the whole metro area shouldn't be viewed as simply an uniform stretch of stripmalls.

I agree that having sources for how the divisions are decided is an issue. I do not think, however, that notoriety outside of the Houston area is a requirement, though (by that argument the whole "Components" section could be stripped since most most people don't know much about the towns around Houston). In other words, notability is significant as to whether to include some random fact which otherwise is irrelevant. However, wrt facts and information that help to understand the topic as a whole, the fact that any particular piece of information is by itself notable is irrelevant.

I think that some set of divisions could be established that is reasonably sourced (i.e. I don't know that we'll find a good source that draws a hard set of lines dividing the whole area but I think we can reasonably find sources for individual areas that establish that the groupings are common viewpoints). Mind you, the goal in this article would not be to establish these are somehow "official" divisions but just to subdivide the topic in a useful way to explain it better.

--Mcorazao (talk) 16:27, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

So let me propose the following actual divisions:

• Central Houston - Basically the main parts of Houston excepting some outlying areas that have a closer affinity with nearby suburbs.
• Fort Bend - Sugarland, Rosenberg, Missouri City, and other areas. (reference: Fort Bend Chamber of Conference)
• Bay Area / Galveston - Galveston and the communities near the bay including Pasadena, Baytown, Clear Lake, and Texas City (reference: Bay Area Houston Economic Partnership)
• 45 North Corridor - Conroe, Woodlands, Spring (reference: Romantic Weekends Texas by Abbott, pg. 71)
• Lake Houston Area - Humble, Kingwood, Atascocita, Dayton (reference: Humble Area Chamber of Commerce, which is changing its name to Lake Houston Area Chamber of Commerce)
• Houston West - Memorial City, Westchase, Katy, Alief (reference: Houston West Chamber of Commerce)
• Houston Northwest - North Houston, Cypress, Tomball, etc. (reference: Houston Northwest Chamber of Commerce)
• 288 South Corridor - Pearland, Manvel, Alvin, Friendswood (reference: Texas 288 South)

I've provided a few references indicating that these divisions are not arbitrary (albeit not universal, of course). I'm suggesting just a section that just contains these divisions and in a few sentences mentions the major municipalities and their economic/topographic/demographic uniqueness. Note that there far outlying areas in the CSA that this doesn't cover. If anybody feels that is an oversight a brief "Outlying areas" section could be added to mention these (I think, though, a brief mention of that in the intro paragraph is sufficient, though. Most of those outlying communities would probably not be considered by most sources to be part of Greater Houston regardless of what the OMB technically says).

--Mcorazao (talk) 18:29, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Why not use counties as divisions? Postoak (talk) 18:46, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

That would be fine if the county lines were useful divisions for the purposes of discussion of the economic ties and social connections of the regions. Unfortunately whereas those county lines might have had a lot of meaning 100 years ago now they are little more than arbitrarily lines of jurisdiction (not that those jurisdictions aren't important but they are insignificant compared to roles of the businesses, towns, and population concentrations).

Look at, for example, the San Francisco Bay Area article. The divisions they use have little to do with the county lines (in some cases the county lines coincide with the divisions to some degree but they are not using the county lines exclusively as their guide).

--Mcorazao (talk) 20:06, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

BTW, I'm not married to these divisions. I think these are generally representative of how most people would subdivide the area but certainly one could subdivide in a lot of other ways. --Mcorazao (talk) 20:06, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Actually, let me amend the above. Galveston and the Bay Area are probably best split up. Galveston's history and its economy are very distinct from the Bay Area. --Mcorazao (talk) 20:22, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

I see your point, however The Greater Houston Partnership uses the county lines as the divisions for Greater Houston. [1]. We have 10 existing counties along with 8 potential divisions that aren't that well known. It will be difficult to find sources defining the divisions because each source will probably vary - unless we use the chamber of commerce refs you provided (hopefully the boundaries don't overlap!) I like the organization of the San Francisco Bay article, however I would think the divisions there have long existed. Thanks, Postoak (talk) 20:41, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

The SFBA divisions have always been arbitrary and have varied over time. Honestly I am not sure that those divisions are particularly more well established that Houston per se but since the SFBA is more prestigious its divisions are more well known. And, simply because the region is more polar (since there are 3 major cities) and the bay geography breaks things up more, the divisions of the SFBA fall out more naturally so everybody can agree on them (and in reality, these divisions are not universally held; not everybody would break down the SFBA in exactly this way).

In any event, though I think it is important to use divisions that are recognized by sources as being significant, I don't think it is necessary these divisions be extremely notable since the purpose of discussing the divisions is not to claim that they are notable. For comparison, if I am writing an article about, say, Einstein's time dilation principle and I invent some example that involves a mouse that can run near the speed of light, I do not need to establish that the mouse being connected to this theory is notable. The mouse was only there to educate on the general topic. The only thing that is important is whether the point being made was correct, not the notability of how the point was made in the article. In the case of these divisions, some amount of notability is appropriate but still we are only using them as educational tools.

--Mcorazao (talk) 21:00, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Note that if someone is going to write an article about one of those subregions then a higher standard of notability for that region is in order. --Mcorazao (talk) 21:10, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Proposed text: subregions

Let me take a stab at some proposed text. This is incomplete but gives an idea.

Subregions

The Houston area can be divided into several distinct regions.

Houston core

Houston, Texas' largest city, is a growing cosmopolitan, multicultural city, one of the nation's largest. The city contains a diverse economy and is home to more Fortune 500 corporation headquarters than any city except New York. The city features nationally recognized arts programs, museums, and restaurants. It contains the second busiest port in the nation and a major international community.

Houston originally fit within Loop 610 but the city has grown to the point that it occupies most of the area within Beltway 8 (and beyond). In reality Houston's core includes some independent cities enclosed within the city of Houston: Bellaire, West University Place, Southside Place, and South Houston. The city's core, though it has no fixed definition, can be considered to be the area within the Loop plus many of the immediately surrounding areas within the Beltway.

Galveston

An island city, Galveston was once Texas' largest city, a major commercial center, and one of the nation's most important ports. Today the city has evolved into a significant tourist destination that features scenic beaches and important historic districts. Its cruise terminal is the fourth busiest in the nation. The island is also an important shipping center and home to the University of Texas Medical Branch.

Fort Bend

Fort Bend County sits to the southwest of Houston and includes the cities of Missouri City, Rosenberg, and Sugar Land. One of the fastest growing regions, Fort Bend has a diverse economy, particularly in Sugar Land, as it has become an attractive residential and commercial center. Area industries range from engineering and construction to electronics and communications.

Bay Area

The Bay Area region lies along the shores of the Galveston Bay. It is one of the most populous of the outlying regions of the metro area. The region contains many municipalities including Clear Lake City (an outlying portion of Houston), Pasadena, Baytown, and Texas City. The area surrounding the bay contains industries key to the metro area. Home to the NASA's Johnson Space Center the area contains the vast majority of the workers in the aerospace industry in the metro area. Additionally the area is home to the largest oil refineries and chemical complexes in Greater Houston.

45 North Corridor

The communities along Interstate 45 north of Houston include Spring, the Woodlands, Conroe, as well as Intercontinental Airport. Much of this area is significantly wooded as its terminus is Sam Houston National Forest.

Lake Houston Area

The area near Lake Houston includes the cities of Humble, Kingwood, Atascocita, and Dayton.

Houston West

The Houston West region lies along Interstate 10 to the west of Houston including Memorial City, Westchase, Katy, and other nearby communities. The Alief area is also often included as well.

Much of this region is relatively prosperous with perhaps its most well known section being the Energy Corridor, a conglomeration of corporate offices for energy-related companies.

Houston Northwest

The Houston Northwest region lies along Highway 290 and Highway 249 northwest of the city. The region includes North Houston, Jersey Village, Cypress, and Tomball.

288 South Corridor

South of Houston along Highway 288 lie the communities of Pearland, Manvel, Alvin, among others.

Far outlying areas

Farther in the outlying areas of the Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area and the Combined Statistical Area are numerous other communities. Though considered part of the metro area by some sources they are remote enough from the city that they are not typically thought of as part of the Houston area. Some of these remote communities include Huntsville, Bay City, Brenham, Eagle Lake, and College Station.

Comment: I can agree and support this. There are a couple additional facts I would like to include in several of the sections, but I need to dig up the sources first. --Nsaum75 (talk) 05:31, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Reply: Thanks. Yes, the text here is incomplete. I was just trying to demonstrate what I was talking about. I do wonder if this is too many divisions, though. Maybe 45 north and Lake Jackson should be grouped? --Mcorazao (talk) 13:58, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

P.S. I'm inclined to strike the "Far outlying areas" subsection. I only put it there to guard against complaints that the designated divisions did not necessarily technically cover the outer reaches of the MSA/CSA. But adding a whole section for political correctness is probably an overkill. --Mcorazao (talk) 15:56, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

P.P.S. As I think about it, the Channelview area isn't directly addressed in the categories as written. It is a not-so-small community sitting between the Belt and the Bay Area. I don't think it is appropriate to classify it as a Bay Area community (it is near bays, to be sure, but not the Galveston Bay). It seems a stretch to call it part of the Houston core (although, frankly, my understanding is that it has never developed a particularly distinct identity from Houston). Hate to add another section ... --Mcorazao (talk) 16:10, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Metropolitan divisions

This is getting out of context for a metropolitan area article. We should only include information that has been officially defined.

The U.S. OMB divides some metropolitan areas into what is called "metropolitan divisions"—a term that is used to refer to a county or group of closely-tied contiguous counties that serve as a distinct employment region within a metropolitan statistical area that has a population core of at least 2.5 million. While a metropolitan division is a subdivision of a larger metropolitan statistical area, it often functions as a distinct social, economic, and cultural area within the larger region.

Texas has 25 officially defined metropolitan areas defined by the OMB, but only Dallas–Fort Worth–Arlington MSA has metropolitan divisions. The two metropolitan divisions within Dallas–Fort Worth–Arlington MSA are Dallas–Plano–Irving and Fort Worth–Arlington.

The U.S. OMB divides metropolitan divisions by counties and principal cities. Houston–Sugar Land–Baytown currently encompasses 10 counties with four principal cities defined: Houston, Sugar Land, Baytown, and Galveston.

The U.S. OMB has not divided Houston–Sugar Land–Baytown MSA into metropolitan divisions because our metro area does not currently meet the criteria to be divided. If our metro area was to be divided into metropolitan divisions today, it would most likely contain two divisions: Houston–Sugar Land and Baytown–Galveston. With that said, Baytown–Galveston would most likely encompass three counties: Brazoria, Chambers, and Galveston.

Maybe I should suggest that the Galveston Bay Area article be defined by county lines, which would be less arbitrary and inline with the future metropolitan division that the U.S. OMB might define for the Houston–Sugar Land–Baytown metropolitan area.

—RJN (talk) 19:28, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, I'll respectfully disagree. First off, if you have concerns about the Galveston Bay Area article you should discuss that there.

In any event regarding the proposal, the OMB designations are very useful definitions to use to help scope topics but this is not WikiOMB. Whether or not the OMB or any other particular entity chooses to describe an area in any particular way is not the primary criteria for deciding article content. Article content should be first and foremost educational. As long as the way the information is being described is not inconsistent with mainstream scholarship it is not inappropriate.

The county lines are fine to the extent that they describe meaningful delineations. But in many (most?) major metropolitan areas, the county lines have very little to do with understanding the communities (except for understanding the county government which is generally much less important than the city governments, the business community, and cultural connections). I agree that we have to try to avoid WP:SYNTH in coming up with delineations but just because we describe a topic in a way that is different from some sources does not mean that the description contradicts any of those sources.

--Mcorazao (talk) 21:12, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Soapbox: There is something that some editors seem to lose sight of. WP:Notability specifically states "Notability guidelines do not directly limit article content." The purpose of Wikipedia is ultimately education and enlightenment. Decisions about content should be made primarily based on their educational value. Most of the policies (WP:OR, WP:VERIFY, etc.) are designed to ensure those decisions are made as objectively as possible. Those policies, however, are not intended to replace Wikipedia's purpose. Whether or not any one source mentions certain information does not have any direct bearing on whether the information should be included. These articles about municipalities and metro areas, though it is extremely useful to use OMB definitions and statistics as starting points, ultimately should not be only about the OMB definitions. Ultimately a single OMB definition by itself is not a significant enough topic to merit an article (and if that is really what Greater Houston is about then much of the existing content needs to be removed). --Mcorazao (talk) 18:18, 23 September 2009 (UTC)