Talk:Little Mexico

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Little Mexico article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

United States: Mexican-Americans Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Mexican-American task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Articles for creation

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted on 9 July 2010 by reviewer My76Strat (talk · contribs).

Figures on indoor plumbing, etc., need a context

To be accurate and useful, figures on what percentage of housing in the 1940s lacked indoor plumbing (or similar stats) need to be placed into the context of what was typical for that time. While I've no doubt that the area was less developed than the surrounding areas, it's important to remember that even into the 1950s, there were plenty of areas where even the non-marginalized didn't have such facilities at home. Lawikitejana (talk) 13:18, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agree - this is one reason that urban renewal was undertaken across the country - to take down what was considered substandard housing and replace it with something better. Not always done well but it was well intentioned.Parkwells (talk) 18:58, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Parks and recreation question

I'll try to find if the originator(s) of the article have user pages where I can ask this, but in the meantime ... there's mention in the article that Mexicans (which in common usage for the time period and today often includes(ed) Mexican-Americans) weren't allowed in Pike Park until 1931. A 1920 news article I found in the Morning News archive refers to some place in Little Mexico called "Mexican Park," where Christmas activities were going to be sponsored. Anyone who can get clarification on what park they were describing? Lawikitejana (talk) 13:22, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

May be that it was also the difference between official and unofficial uses.Parkwells (talk) 18:59, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Little Mexico. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071222205424/http://www.dallashistory.org/history/dallas/st_anns.htm to http://www.dallashistory.org/history/dallas/st_anns.htm

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) 21:54, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Recommend addition of Infobox containing OpenStreetMap or Historic Map of Little Mexico Boundaries overlaid on present day Dallas

Hi Wikipedians, I recommend creation of an Infobox similar to that shown in this representative example for Chinatown, Manhattan or a Historic Map.

Comments supporting addition of map: The opening paragraph describes the boundaries quite explicitly, and my cursory review for additional primary sources indicates that these boundaries could be confirmed by multiple contemporaneous sources. The opening paragraph describes the boundaries relative to historic features which limits the effectiveness of its ability to convey the size and location of the neighborhood to present day readers with less awareness of historic features. The existing 'Demise' section in this article reference the impacts of highway construction and imminent domain which could be more clearly conveyed by overlaying the historic boundaries atop existing structures.

Discussion on use of OpenStreetMap areas: OpenStreetMap allows creation of a 'neighborhood' place type as referenced here. The context implies that neighborhood is most typically used for currently recognized neighborhoods, and I'm not sure if this reference to a largely historic use is appropriate.

Discussion on use of a Static Map: Wikipedia discusses static maps in these two articles Wikipedia:Maps for Wikipedia & Wikipedia:WikiProject Maps/Conventions/Historical maps While these approaches seem feasible, I think they diminish the effectiveness of the map by omitting the context of the boundaries relative to current land use.

I'd welcome any thoughts from others. TheMailNerd (talk) 15:42, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]