Talk:Nottingham Forest, Houston

This article was nominated for merging with Memorial, Houston on <21 November 2010>. The result of the discussion was After two weeks with no discussion, merged per WP:SILENCE.

This article was nominated for deletion on 24 September 2010 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

This article was nominated for deletion on 26 February 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

Houston (inactive)

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Houston, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.HoustonWikipedia:WikiProject HoustonTemplate:WikiProject HoustonHouston articles

United States: Texas Low‑importance

	United States portal This redirect 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 redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Texas portal This redirect is supported by WikiProject Texas (assessed as Low-importance).

Objectivity

This article seems to have a very strong agenda in the "Crime" section. Definitely NOT NPOV. Seems someone dislikes the Katrina refugees and is venting a little. I can't say I blame him/her, I don't like what many have done to the city, on a whole I think they drag it down, but I'm not sure if this article is the best place to vent that. Still, seeing as they included sources, I'm not going to delete.Mmyers1976 (talk) 19:21, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know what the crime wave has been like - I live in this neighborhood - and there have been refugees living in the bayou, coming out at dusk and robbing residents. While it may sound a bit harsh, it is true that there has been an increase in crime in all areas of the city since August 2005. Just last year, an old couple just behind where I live were robbed at gunpoint by a badly dressed African-American who had ran out of Terry Hershey Park. The neighborhood newsletter reports crime every month. Sadly, these Katrina refugees are trying to earn a living by robbing the wealthier. Also, there are hundreds of other online sources. — JuWiki (Talk <> Resources) 21:25, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your sources do clearly indicate a crime rise. However, the language here is misleading - the sentence "...There have been multiple robberies and assaults, all committed by evacuees, in the past year..." reads as if ALL of these crimes are to do with evacuees. It is unclear. Also, "...Because this upper-middle class neighborhood is located next to an apartment complex which is accepting Section 8 vouchers, it has become a target for evacuees..." is unfounded. This needs a citation, surely. - Daniel Walker (talk) 23:12, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I live in Ashford Forest north of Buffalo Bayou, which pretty much blends seamlessly into the section of Nottingham Forest at the corner of Memorial and Dairy-Ashford, so I am not unfamiliar with the situation. I don't disagree with your feelings on the subject, but this is not the place to vent them. You have provided sources on the rise in crime in Houston in Katrina in general, but you have provided no credible sources that a significant portion of crimes in Nottingham Forest VIII (or even any of the crimes committed there) have been committed by Katrina refugees. That makes what you wrote about Katrina refugees targeting upper-middle class Nottingham Forest conjecture. I totally agree with your opinion, but Wikipedia is not the place to vent.Mmyers1976 (talk) 20:44, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

After rereading paragraph about Katrina evacuees and crime in the neighborhood, I felt it needed to be deleted. Yes, there were sources that linked the increase of crime in Houston as a whole to Katrina evacuees, there were no sources that linked an increase in crime in Nottingham Forest VIII to evacuees, and so certainly nothing to support the sentence"...There have been multiple robberies and assaults, all committed by evacuees, in the past year..." There was no source for the contention that Section 8 voucher-holders were living in nearby apartments (even though I believe it to be true), and the contention that Katrina evacuees are "targeting" our neighborhood, while something I believe to be true, is unencyclopedic. The talk about this situation causing "tensions" in the neighborhood is vague and unencyclopedicMmyers1976 (talk) 20:58, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I can understand why this paragraph may be offensive to some people, but deleting it entirely might be too much. I say we should change the sentence in question to "There have been multiple robberies and assaults, most [or many] committed by evacuees." (Unsigned comment addes by "JuWiki2")

I really don't care if Katrina evacuees are offended or not, they are a scourge to our city - the paragraph shouldn't be deleted because of others' delicate sensibilities, it should be deleted because it is unverified. The supposed sources included in the paragraph discuss increases of crime associated with Katrina evacuees in the city of Houston in general - a city over 500 square miles in area. These sources do not mention Nottingham Forest at all, so they do not support the claim that there is an increae in crime in Nottingham Forest, or that Katrina refugees have committed any crimes in Nottingham Forest.Even your suggested fix of "most" or "many" crimes being committed in Nottingham Forest by Katrina evacuees is unverified - see WP:Weasel . There is no source that substantiates that ANY crimes have been committed in NOTTINGHAM FOREST by Katrina evacuees. If you can find even one or two specific reports that state specific crimes committed by specific people who were verified to be Katrina evacuees, I would be happy to see a paragraph on Katrina evacuees and crime in Nottingham Forest, but until then, it has no place here.Mmyers1976 (talk) 14:32, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Inconsistency with article title

This article refers to Nottinham Forest VIII as "Nottingham Forest." This is not the same neighborhood. Nottingham Forest is between Kirkwood and Dairy Ashford, South of Memorial drive, and is zoned to Meadow Wood elementary. For people looking for information on Nottingham Forest, this article is misleading. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Katjs (talk • contribs) 16:49, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree that this is misleading. The article is actually about the VIII subsection of Nottingham Forest. Postoak (talk) 23:29, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've finally fixed this (a year later). The article now covers the subdivision of Nottingham Forest, which is two neighborhoods (Nottingham Forest and Nottingham Forest VIII) combined. — TheDarthEgg 22:59, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

I question the notability of a subsection of a surburban subdivision neighborhood. I recommend this article be AfD'dMmyers1976 (talk) 14:55, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see that the notability request and nomination for deletion was done concurrently. I would have given the editors some time to establish notability before requesting deletion, but I do agree that the current version isn't notable. Postoak (talk) 23:36, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Living across the street from this neighborhood, I didn't see how it could possibly be notable (not like my neighborhood is either), so I pushed through on AfD right after questioning notability. I'm new to AfDing (this is my second one), I'll remember to allow some time between notability request and AfDing next time. Thanks for the constructive feedback.Mmyers1976 (talk) 17:03, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ech... I was afraid this would occur sooner or later. With this article being my first firmly established work on Wikipedia, it'll be hard to deal with deleting the page. I agree that Nottingham Forest VIII is hardly notable, but I don't like the idea of two years' worth of work going to waste. But, still, it is Wikipedia policy, and I'm barley editing anymore since my original account malfunctioned, so I guess the deletion will commence. I can't believe it took until 2009 for NF8's page to be submitted to AFD. It was good while it lasted. — JuWiki (Talk <> Resources) 00:23, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

P.S.: the AFD nomination page includes a comment regarding my inclusion of NF8's position on the city's wealthiest neighborhood list. I never meant for its listing to be a means for notability. — JuWiki (Talk <> Resources) 00:25, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you won't be discouraged to continue contributing here, by this, it's just part of the process that is Wikipedia. Just a couple months ago I found a stub article on my old junior high school, and I spent a lot of time cleaning it up and adding information on the history of the school, including its previous location, only to have an editor come in and delete the page because junior highs are generally non-notable. Sucked a little to have my work evaporate like that, but it opened my eyes up to the nonnotability of elementary and junior high schools. Your work also need not go to waste. I think there is a very good chance that a "Memorial Area, Houston" article would pass muster as notable, and your information on Nottingham Forest, Section VIII would be a good addition to that. Maybe you are just the person to originate an article on the Memorial Area.Mmyers1976 (talk) 15:09, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Memorial, Houston. Postoak (talk) 19:19, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, there is one already. Thanks. Mmyers1976 (talk) 19:24, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of Memorial, would it be a good idea to merge this article with the main Memorial page? Or is the Memorial area too broad to encompass a detailed section on Nottingham Forest without mentioning the dozens of other neighborhoods in its radius? — JuWiki (Talk <> Resources) 21:01, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe others will have a different perspective, but merging this into the Memorial page sounds like a good idea to me.Mmyers1976 (talk) 21:12, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely, I think this is a great idea. We may need to expand coverage of the other Memorial neighborhoods in the Memorial article and trim Nottingham Forest a little. Postoak (talk) 23:19, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But what about the other neighborhoods in the Memorial area? — JuWiki (Talk <> Resources) 01:15, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sports Subsection under Education

Subsection made it sound like these teams were officially affiliated with the neighborhood, rather than being part of the high school, which serves a wide area, or youth leagues serving a wide area. Also, youth leagues like a Little League team have nothing to do with Education, and so shouldn't be part of a subsection of a section on education. Finally, having a sports subsection in the education section that just mentions the three marque boys' sports teams at the exclusion of all the girls's teams and all the other boys' teams puts undue weight on those marque teams; in fact, just focusing on these sports teams in the education section puts undue weight on sports at Stratford, to the exclusion of all the other nonathletic extracurricular activities at which students excel. Obviously one cannot list all extracurricular activities, but there is already a solution - Stratford High School already has its own Wikipedia article, is already named in the article, and anyone wanting to find more information about its sports and other extracurriculars can look there. Mmyers1976 (talk) 15:44, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]