Talk:Charleston, West Virginia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
 It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality, if possible.
Wikipedians in West Virginia may be able to help!

== MSA ==research? Ajwebb 03:13, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

  • I changed this information to reflect the information from the Census Bureau. If anyone finds this information not factually correct, please change it. Ajwebb 20:04, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Suburbs Correction

South Hills and Kanawha City are neighborhoods within the city limits of Charleston, and should not be listed a suburbs of the city. WVhybrid 04:50, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merge on Roads of Charleston, West Virginia

Strong oppose: Not satisfied with screwing up the redirects to it, the 4.234.165.179 is suggesting Roads of Charleston, West Virginia it be merged with this city page. Can you imagine the page of roads being squished into an already lengthy city page? The roads page offers a unique resource that is both lengthy and in depth, comparable with similar pages at:

More will be created soon to supplement these new pages. Now will the attacks on the page stop? Seicer (talk) (contribs) 01:02, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Roads of Charleston, West Virginia should be merged with this article. The bulk of the content is already here; what isn't (like the pictures) will improve this article. In addition, cities with only 50,000 people don't merit articles with the title "Roads of..." and "List of roads of..." as there would be easily turned into listcruft/roadcruft as the title would imply that all the surface streets (like Oakland Avenue) would have to be included. That would be unwieldy for a small town like Charleston. Imagine the mess that Roads of Atlanta, Georgia or Roads of Los Angeles or Roads of Jacksonville, Florida would be... 4.234.165.179 01:05, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
That is because the project was begun by me, enhanced by numerous other editors, not that long ago. The welcome for it was overwhelming. The attacks I mentioned was the "speedy delete" tag applied just minutes after one of the pages was initially created, and then the whole redirect-hell mess. Charleston is a major junction for three interstates, two US highways, and many state routes. It is a city that is the largest in West Virginia, the capital, and a critical transportation junction. To omit it would be cramming all the information into a very lengthy Charleston page. The threats of AFD have no bearing on this discussion, and since it has not been submitted, then stop with the sassy threats. Perhaps you should get a few more edits under your belt... Seicer (talk) (contribs) 01:16, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
And to add, since one particular editor cannot comprehend what the page is about, and for further clearification: Roads of Charleston... is not City streets of Charleston. It is simply categorised under City specific, to which the purpose was clearly indicated upon the article's creation. Your argument is nullified, since only notable roadways would need to be explained. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 01:18, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Please, no personal attacks. Comment on the content, not the editor who wrote them. Much of the editors involved in US Roads articles have had their fair share of less-than-civil discussion lately with Arbcom and WP:SRNC and WP:USSH and WP:RfC, amongst others. Let's lower the temperature of discourse a notch, please... B.Wind 20:05, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Oppose This seems like it could be a model page for a future project to prevent the messes that the merge nom fears. If anything, merging into the Chas. article would make a real mess. youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 01:19, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

This might be better as Transportation of Charleston, West Virginia. But this should definitely not be merged with the Charleston article. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 01:31, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
When the page is completed, you would be having a very large article. It would not be feasable if you included rail, air, and river service, especially since each could have a lengthy page devoted to it. This goes back to the very beginning of this page, when someone slapped a delete tag minutes after I initially created it, thus demostrating that they are not here as constructive editors but as tag-happy users. Same thing with this IPuser, who has contributed nothing of value outside of tags. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 01:40, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
These IPs are rogue and not helpful to the encyclopedia. This is disturbing. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 01:46, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Oppose This should not be merged with the article. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 01:43, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Strong oppose per above arguments. Consider this: a section already exists in this article about transportation in the city, and this section is sufficient for an article that's intended to be about the entire city, not one part of it. Does anyone see a full-blown section on Frontier Field in Rochester, New York? No, because that information would be too specific for the city article. That's why the article Frontier Field exists. The same argument applies here. Is there a full blown section on this page for every highway that enters the city limits? No, only one section listing them all because sections for each highway would be far too specific for this page. That's why Roads of Charleston, West Virginia exists and why it should remain as a stand-alone article. --TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 20:43, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Oppose, Oppose, Oppose per above. No justification whatsoever for a merge. WVhybrid 00:23, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Oppose! I don't know if anybody cares on what my opinion is, but I oppose to the article Roads of Charleston, West Virginia being merged with Charleston, West Virginia. In the infrastructure section of the Charleston article, there should only be a brief discription of the city's highways, with a link to the "Roads of Charleston" article. The road article will give a much larger discription with photos. I think the merge tag should be eliminated. The Punk 07:41, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

  • I also oppose merging detailed information about the city's highways into the main article. I think it's good to have such details pulled out onto a separate page, so that those who are interested can click on the link, and those who aren't can skip past. Concerns regarding the notability of detailed information about roads and streets in an encyclopedia can then be addressed on the talk page of the roads article -- or in an AfD proposal, if one wanted to push it that far. I suspect that an AfD proposal on the matter would probably fail for lack of consensus -- and that's fine with me. I'm not really interested in the Category:Britney Spears songs, but I'm not upset that the category exists. The Wikipedia's a big project, and can accommodate much detail. It's not paper. Malepheasant 09:33, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment - this discussion would be much better served at either the village pump or the WikiProject U.S. Roads as this borders on establishing Wikipedia policy as to inclusion/exclusion of articles, and a wider cross section of input is needed here. Frankly, I see one big, fat slippery slope here... two actually as the "other" obvious question is going to be "What are the limits to inclusion?" (i.e., should all the Charleston streets be listed? Should every city with population greater than 20,000 have a similar article?). This will have ramifications beyond any localized WikiProject, and it needs to be discussed by the Wikipedia community at large. B.Wind 20:05, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
    • I made it pretty clear that the article was not to focus on "city streets" as one user defined the page as being (he didn't comment on this, oddly enough), but to be a detailed guide on the interstates, federal highways, state routes, and major thoroughfares. The only thoroughfare worth noting is Kanawha Blvd. along the river, as the rest multiplex with their respective routes. The pages work great as-is; if it isn't broken, let's not try to go and fix it or redefine the pages. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 20:40, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
      • Much more easily said than done. Although Seicer apparently has a specific plan for the page, it must be pointed out that he/she won't be the only editor of it. Another person with another "vision" of it may interpret by the title that the article can contain more than Seicer's vision of it, and any edit along that line of reasoning must be considered in good faith, and we - all of us - must act/react appropriately to it. To do otherwise violates one of the most important policies of Wikipedia. B.Wind 22:58, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Schools

We need to decide whether this article is about the City of Charleston or the Charleston MSA. For example, in the schools section, only Capital, George Washington and Charleston Catholic are mentioned (but not the other Kanawha Cty high schools), while in the "Economy" section, companies are listed which are in other areas of the valley. Boomer 22:16, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps the schools section ought to include specific geographical references? Herbert Hoover, Sissonville, et al should perhaps be mentioned as being in the metro area, but top-of-the-section real estate ought to be given to the three high schools actually within city limits. Shapu 20:50, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../c/h/a/Talk%7ECharleston%2C_West_Virginia_38d5.html"