Talk:Columbus, Ohio

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of the WikiProject on Cities which aims to improve and standardize articles on cities, towns, and other municipalities of the world. Make suggestions for improving multiple articles on these subjects at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities.

This article is part of WikiProject Ohio, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Ohio. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

This article has been selected for Version 0.5 and the next release version of Wikipedia. This Geography article has been rated B-Class on the assessment scale.

Please do not add external links in the body of the article. They should go at the end under ==External links== . Bmills 16:03, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Notable buildings in Columbus

I added this section so that there was an easily found section collecting all the cool buildings of columbus but maybe a new page similar to notable buildings of cleveland page....--Stranger 11:11, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure having a list is the best way to present this topic. I definitely agree it should be addressed, but bullet points don't set a good precident, IMHO. There is already a section titled 'Landmarks and Museums', perhaps this could be expanded/merged rather than having a list. At the very least, merging would help reduce the redundancy that is so prevalent in this article. Analoguekid 14:37, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree. All of the buildings in the list are already mentioned and wikilinked elsewhere in the article. Not to be harsh, Stranger, but this is a redundant section. --Wild Goose 21:08, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Test Market

I have reinserted the statement that COlumbus is a oft-used test market for new products. http://www.britannica.com/ebi/article-9273747; hopefully some experts on the subject of consumer goods can back me up on this with more citations and more detailed material. -User:Electrostal17Feb06 800EST

That's cool, the info is good and credible. But I don't think that one sentence about a topic should warrant its own subject heading. Also, future citations should be included as footnotes in the article, preferably with books or published media as references. Sorry to single out the "test market" info in this case. The lack of citations is really something that applies to the "Columbus" article as a whole. Thanks! Wild Goose 14:52, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Demographics

Under Demographics, I added the City of Columbus Population by year history from 1840 thru 2000. JeffreyAllen1975 03:41, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Shopping

Does anyone else agree that the "Shopping" section contains too many irrelevant details? Stating the specific stores at the Easton mall is a bit iffy, but saying that The Limited carries "polka dotted chiffon skirts" has nothing to do with Columbus or a Columbus-specific mall. Urban48 18:13, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, both "Nightlife" and "Shopping" are poorly written sections. The whole thing reads like a tourism brochure, not an encyclopedia article. I deleted them. I think some of the stuff in shopping might be incorporated into a brief paragraph about the retail sector in Columbus, categorized under "Economy." But in any case, these additions should strive for paragraph form, not a laundry list with bullet points. -- Wild Goose 19:51, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Nightlife

Under "Nightlife", there are odd statements such as "the best party in town", etc when describing various bars/clubs. This is an opinionated statement really, and shouldn't be in there.

So change it. Wild Goose 19:51, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Ok. Just wanted to see if anyone else agreed with me. Thanks. Urban48 15:19, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Performing Arts

This section needs cleaned up. Much of it belongs under sports, including information about sporting venues which occasionally host concerts. --Jshecket 22:13, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Adult Amateur Sports

I'm not sure this section meets Wikipedia's standards of relevance. --Jshecket 05:59, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

I tend to agree. Especially now that Louisville has gotten a Featured Article, I think we should hold the Columbus article to a higher standard. --Wild Goose 14:02, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

So should we remove it? --Jshecket 02:36, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Done. --Wild Goose 04:00, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

I don't even think the Columbus Capitals mention is appropriate. I think the person who put it there in the first place was only trying to advance a personal agenda. --Jshecket 15:47, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "Arch City"

I have lived in Columbus for 23 years now and this is the first time I have heard it referred to as "The Arch City". Some Google research indicates that although at one point the city council officially nicknamed Columbus "Arch City", this is much more of a historic name than a common or current one. Gmcapt 00:43, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I thought about that.... I know it's not a very well-known nickname, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. Besides, I would argue that historical nicknames are the only ones that stick. Pittsburgh doesn't produce much steel anymore, but it's still known as the Steel City. Chicago's politicians aren't the blowhards they once were, but it's still known as the Windy City. The Arch City nickname can become more common and more well-known if we choose to use it publicly in forums such as this. The alternative nickname is "The Discovery City" which might be more current but it seems contrived, like a PR initiative from the city's board of tourism. Wild Goose 15:15 19 July 2005 (UTC)

It should be mentioned in the history section, and tied to the period in which it was used, but not used in the introductory paragraph. That would imply a much greater (and current) usage than is the case. I myself lived in Columbus for 25 years and never heard it. Postdlf 18:26, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

That sounds like an acceptable compromise. I encountered the nickname very recently and thought it would be cool to contribute something unique and interesting to Columbus' (mostly bland) identity. But at the risk of misleading Wikipedia readers, it is probably best not to proclaim such an obscure nickname in the opening sentence of the article. Wild Goose 20:21 19 July 2005 (UTC)

In light of this discussion, how is it that the Infobox now has "Nickname: The Arch City"? There's nothing I see in the box or the article itself that implies that the nickname is only of historical interest. Jwolfe 02:21, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I was curious why "Discovery City" was deleted from the previous infobox. But to the extent that any city nickname has value besides historical or anecdotal interest, I don't see why this one shouldn't be included in the infobox, too.Wild Goose 21:12, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Um, isn't "because nobody uses it" a good enough reason? This is not something like "Big Apple" that everybody knows and associates with the city. It's an obscure historical reference at best. Jwolfe 05:35, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

I would argue that the Big Apple is the exception, not the rule. Clearly, there is a precedent for obscure city nicknames, such as City of Oaks, Capital of the New Century, Beehive of Industry, City of Roses, Circle City, and Star City, just to name a few.Wild Goose 14:58, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Only nicknames that have a documented usage should be documented first of all, and if that usage is long past, then they should only be included in the infobox if followed by the parenthetical "(historical)" or something like that, to make it clear that it's an obsolete nickname. I think that should please everyone. (?) Postdlf 15:28, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

I have no problem if you can document a historical usage, so long as it is marked as historical. But listing it without any comment implies a current usage, which isn't the case. Jwolfe 22:02, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Both nicknames (Arch and Discovery) are documented in the book by Ed Lentz, which is currently listed as a reference in the article.Wild Goose 22:01, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Discovery Place (Discover Columbus) is also a book of it's own. Pushed by Columbus when the campaign name for it was around. It is also mentioned in Henry L Hunker's Columbus Ohio, a ersonal geography. Though it is a term created for columbus based on a political campaing to revamp the image of ohio, and is more like, "Ohio, heart of it all." Which changes over time. That's my understanding anyway. 65.25.155.252 01:17, 14 March 2006 (UTC) dan

[edit] Only five more days

After next Wednesday, I'm going to start asking people which state's capital is Columbus, just to see if they can spot the pun. — JIP | Talk 13:28, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Um... I don't get it. Wild Goose 14:28, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

It's a Finnish thing. — JIP | Talk 14:30, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Explanation

"Ohion", the Finnish language genitive case of Ohio, sounds like "ohi on", meaning "it's over". — JIP | Talk 10:02, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Patently Silly Statement

The article notes, "Residents of Columbus include an eclectic mix of students, politicians, artists, and entrepreneurs who participate in a diverse economy supported by government agencies, educational institutions, and the white-collar service sector."

Well d'oh. That could describe pretty much any city in America. What, someone thinks Denver is populated only by Italian-American accountants named Vito? Raleigh has only left-handed lesbian typists? You get the idea.

This sounds like some kind of tripe snipped from a Chamber of Commerce brochure or something mouthed by those upbeat guys who narrate promotional films, "Columbus, city of progress, city of industry, city of tomorrow!" BehroozZ 05:49, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

This particular tripe was snipped from Austin, Texas. Wild Goose 22:35, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Climate?

I really think that the Columbus, Ohio article is great and well written to everyones needs. I like how its written and its very interesting to most people. It would be nice if there was a climate section added to this article.--JeffreyAllen1975 02:34, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Done.Analoguekid 20:50, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Quotation

The James T. Quote might be a true qquote, but in a Fragile Capital, identity and the early years of Columbus, Ohio: Charles C. Cole jr. This Lancaster vote isn't mentioned. For a short time the capitol was in Chillicothe and then Zanesvile. According to the book, Deleware was the other major contender in the end. "The final vote was 13 to 11." p. 6 of that book.

Also, shouldn't all quotes be moved to wikiquote? 65.25.155.252 05:53, 14 March 2006 (UTC) -dan

[edit] New Pictures

It appears that a user has replaced the skyline picutres. In the interest of full disclosure it should be noted that one of them was taken by myself. However, these new pictures, while nice, are most certainly copyrighted, as they seem very familiar. With the moderator's blessing, the page should be reverted to the previous state. It's worth noting that it would be nice to have more variety in the pictures as they are all day shots from around the same location. I will take it upon myself to take some more pictures from different perspectives/time of day. Bcirker

[edit] Updated MSA population

Please note the updated 2005 US census estimates. The number was obtained by referencing the cited spreadsheet, and adding the populations of the counties that make up the Columbus MSA. The counties included in the MSA are (according to US census, not me): Delaware, Fairfield, Franklin, Licking, Madison, Morrow, Pickaway, and Union. Bcirker

[edit] Downtown Pictures

While this article contains severall nice pictures of downtown, I am going to try and get pictures from other parts of downtown, including behind the river (instead of in front of the river), because Columbus is bigger than what is shown in these pictures. Ajwebb 03:11, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hilltop, Columbus, Ohio

The "Hilltop, Columbus, Ohio" article needs some attention. Are there any editors here who wanna take a crack at it? -MrFizyx 06:39, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I took a stab at it; I removed the pure garbage, and tagged the crime claims for needed citations. The gist of it being poverty-stricken and crime-ridden is true, however, from everything I remember about it. And I added info about the now-destroyed State Hospital for the Insane—the creepiest building I've ever seen in my life. The Forgotten Columbus book in the "Images of America" series has some good public domain pictures of it that I'll scan once I get a chance. The West Broad street Hilltop sign (really close to where the hospital used to be) would be a good pic subject too. Postdlf 07:34, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hardesty Heights, Columbus, Ohio

As with Hilltop (written by the same individual), this neighborhood article needs serious work. Postdlf 22:43, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

I would like to see an article done about some of the Public Access TV people like Squirtman and Damon Zex... It seemed to be a big issue in the 90's in Columbus.

[edit] "By far, the sports team that draws the most attention in Columbus is the Ohio State Buckeyes college football team..."

As someone who grew up in Columbus, this statement is an obvious and uncontroversial fact, even though I've never been a football fan. You can't help but notice that no other sports team comes close to receiving the scope and intensity of focus in Columbus that the Buckeyes football team does. However, it isn't exactly the kind of statement that one can find a specific citation for. I know that if we could cite to attendance records, analyze media coverage, and count the percentage of people wearing scarlet and gray in the city and its suburbs on game day Saturday, take a verbal poll, observe bumper stickers...any measure of "attention," these would all support the statement. But do we need to go to that length in this case? We don't as a practice give a citation for every statement of fact in every article. Could someone explain why this particular statement is disputed or questionable? Postdlf 17:19, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

What bothers me about the statement itself is that it is just not encyclopedic. Yes, I know, the Buckeyes are the team in Columbus, and many people would agree with this both in Columbus, in Ohio, and sports fans across the United States. Anyone living in or from Columbus would agree with this statement.

I admit, I may have been hasty to add a ^{[citation needed]} note to the first sentence, however the opening -- "By far" -- does not work when you're trying to avoid POV. In general, the section on the Buckeyes could use some work to become more NPOV and add references (like was done with the "greatest sports rivalry"). I started a little on it by revamping the whole paragraph on non-OSU teams, since it smacked of a bias against teams that were not the "big three" (which in itself is a conflict over it's that or the "big four" (see: big four). College football, however, isn't really something I grasp all too well or am as keen on research when compared to other sports. I do know, though, that saying things such as "80% to 90% of market share tunes in to OSU's game against Michigan" demands citations. Or that they play "in front of over 100,000 rabid Buckeye fans" (98% capacity of people who go to the games are "rabid" fans?) isn't at all possible to prove, and is mainly just POV fluff.--Resident Lune 17:33, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm fine with removing "by far," and "rabid" is certainly POV (I'd more describe Buckeye fans as "fanatically partisan"). I agree that the market share claim is one for which a cite should be provided (and providing one should be quite possible, if it's a true statement). I tried doing a little online searching for that, but without any luck so far. The ESPN greatest sports rivalry claim was easy to verify. Postdlf 17:40, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

I think maybe rewording the comment about "100,000 rabid fans" to something more informative such as "the Buckeyes regularly play home games to capacity or near capacity" with a reference to attendance records (those tend to be pretty easy to grab) would be better, as it would show that they are very popular in Columbus by attendance alone, without the need for suspicious wording. "By far" can be dropped and the citation request can be removed once that's also gone. The comment about the team drawing the most attention won't need a citation in itself because the references to their attendance, its #1 spot as the greatest rivalry in ESPN's eyes, and the (hopefully findable) reference to their local ratings in the Columbus market will all prove that well enough, hopefully.--Resident Lune 17:52, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Cool. Postdlf 18:24, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Featured Article

As those of you who have this page on their watchlist have probably noticed, I have been heavily updating the page over the past few weeks. It is my intention to improve the page to featured article status, hopefully with some help from others. As a proud citizen of this fair city, I cannot stand idle as that city up north has FA status, and ours does not. Thus do I work with a strong impetus. I thought I'd start a discussion topic where we can discuss changes and make suggestions. This isn't a processed to be rushed, I want to make sure we get it right before millions of people look at the page.

The work I've done on the article so far has been mostly re-writing what is already there. However, the article suffers from too much information, IMHO. Thus there will probably need to be some sections removed from this article and placed elsewhere. Since this has the potential to be controversial, I figure it should be discussed prior to changes being made. See the To Do list for subpages which will be created, and could serve as a repository for some info that doesn't belong on the main page.

I'm trying to conform to these standards. I'm also looking at other good articles such as Detroit, Cleveland, San Francisco, and Boston.

[edit] To Do

Create page: History of Columbus, Ohio

See History of Detroit, Michigan as an example. The history section is getting longer, and there is much more to say than could be comfortably stated in a main article.

Create page: Neighborhoods in Columbus, Ohio

See Neighborhoods in San Francisco, California as an example. That way we don't have to have that awkward list of every neighborhood and crossroads in the main article.

Create page: Culture of Columbus, Ohio

See Culture in Boston, Massachusetts as an example. This would be a good place to move the massive paragraph about every festival that goes on here.

Make (or find) pro sports infobox; I seem to remember the page had one at one point and it dissapeared

--Bcirker 18:04, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Sounds ambitious. Somebody must be on winter break ;) Anyway, yeah, I'd like to help with this. Thanks for getting the ball rolling. Regarding the sports infobox: I added one a long time ago, but then deleted it a few months later. After the inclusion of team logos was determined to be against wikipedia policy, the box looked less appealing. Then there were people who kept insisting their semi-pro or amateur teams should be added to the list, which undercut its notability. Then there's the fact that most of the info contained in the infobox was already stated elsewhere in paragraph form, so it seemed redundant. For these reasons, I decided the infobox was just taking up space. Thoughts? --Wild Goose 15:21, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I see what you mean about the sports box. Only Boston has one in their article, and it includes all their championships (Seems they're very proud of those 6 world series wins). I'm content to omit it from the article.--Bcirker 19:19, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lead photo

I'm thinking perhaps we should change the photo at the top of the article. Although the quality is good, there are a number of artifacts that are unflattering. There is a chain link fence as well as a Jersey barrier in the lower left, and a wire running across the top of the picture. It also shows only 3 skyscrapers, and we have many more. Here are a couple of options, and feel free to submit an idea if you know of another good pic.

This is a good panorama taken by Derek, and I cleaned it up a bit to have fewer dark areas. Panoramas are fairly prevalent on other city pages.

This is one of my pictures, which seemed to come out ok.

Thoughts? --Bcirker 04:50, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../c/o/l/Talk%7EColumbus%2C_Ohio_5598.html"