Talk:Colfax Avenue

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Notorious Colfax 2 New information 3 Thanks for tips 4 Fixed 5 NPOV 6 Longest?

[edit] Notorious Colfax

I disagree with getting rid of mention of Colfax's notoriety as a place for prostitution and other odious activities. The way it is written now does not even really talk about crime, but rather people's impressions of crime on Colfax. Isn't that description an accurate representation of what many people think about Colfax? I think it is. By all means, add content that supports or detracts from that postition, but there are numerous articles written about Colfax's criminal reputation. If anyone else has anything to say, please do so.

Vertigo700 23:38, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] New information

Can the newly written sections have more citations of information, and be more neutral in point of view? It's good stuff, but not exactly matching wikipedia standards.Vertigo700 19:21, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

== Sure, I am working on it. I just thought that it was kind of barren. What are wiki standards? Maybe you can help clean it up.

Griffin

I'll take a look at it, but you will probably need to figure out some of the references the Phil Goldstein book is a good place to se if there is more you can use. In general, the sections towards the end are a bit loosely refrenced. An example of this is the Immaculate Cathedral not wanting historical designation. Where does that come from? If it's something that is fairly common sense for an average Denverite familiar with Colfax than you don't necessarily need a refrence for it, but if it's a statement of opinion of a fact that is not common knowledge it probably needs a refrence. You generally do a good job of keeping neutral, but occassionally the prose sounds opinonated, instead of a discussion the situation. Also, the long paragraphs are kind of hard to grasp for a reader, but I can work on formatting. I have a couple of more pictures of Colfax that I can put on here as well. I would suggest you take a look at Wikipedia:Simplified Ruleset for the wikipedia guidelines in general. Also, remember to sign your name on talk pages with four of these: ~

Thank you so much for contributing to wikipedia. Let me be the first one to welcome you to this wonderful community. Vertigo700 20:36, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for tips

Hi, thanks for the tips. Also thanks for editing it. I didnt know how to make new sections, so i am glad you did so. Also, a lot of my info comes from confidential sources that I interviewed for a paper on the assumption that I would only use it in my paper. Should I remove the info if the source wants to remain anonymous?

Griffin303 00:39, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Well that is kind of difficult, considering Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a journalism source. You are definitely using these sources outside of your agreement, and honestly I am not sure that wikipedia is the best place for that kind of information anyway. I think you should look back at what is coming from your source and take it out. If you want to redefine it as a "controversy," or something similar in the community that might be alright, though once again it would be preferable if you had some written source that says that. You should definitely think about what you want to do here. That first paragraph of the last section is particularly tricky. Vertigo700 20:22, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fixed

Hi, i softened up the paragraph you mentioned and gave credit to CHUN. I will go back and add my sources when i have time.

67.176.102.44 06:19, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV

This article appears to have really serious Neutral Point-of-View issues. Case in point:

Denver Urban Renewal Authority also had misbegotten attempts at what they defined as “urban renewal”. In the mistaken belief that tearing down historic buildings and replacing them with Modern Architecture and high-rise monstrosities would benefit the city, DURA bulldozed the bulk of Larimer Street in downtown. In contrast to DURA’s belief that tearing down a building makes the underclass blow away with the dust, the poor moved to the closest area of town that would have them: East Colfax.

I'd put up a "neutrality of this article is disputed" tag, but that code is a little beyond me. I would also be happy to re-write this section, but my knowledge of the history in that part of Denver is seriously lacking.

--Yale2010 08:01, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

You are right. I fixed it. Its hard to be neutral but true at the same time.

67.176.102.44 06:23, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Longest?

It's my understanding that Colfax is the USA's longest continuous named street - can anyone confirm this? The article hints at it in the Playboy headline...

Jbloggs2002 19:31, 5 August 2006 (UTC)