Talk:New Haven, Connecticut

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Connecticut
 This article is part of WikiProject Connecticut, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Connecticut, United States on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
This article is supported by WikiProject Cities, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to cities, towns, and various other settlements on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale.
Archive
Archives
1


Contents

[edit] Illegal immigration controversy

Only the federal court decides whether the City of New Haven actually violates the INA. The flip side of the debate is that issuance of ID cards and drivers licenses are not the reserved functions of Congress, hence the ninth and tenth amendments let the City issue the Elm City cards, since it is never intended to be a proof of immigration status or nationality. Is there an actual federal court ruling that says New Haven is violating the INA? Also, "his opponents" -- who? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.122.9.166 (talk) 02:59, 1 February 2008 (UTC)


==Second City?==Theres nothing in here about Winchester???[[Media:Example.ogg]] Romanista writes: both new haven and hartford clame to be the second city of connecticut, which of the two is it?

which is the first city? Gzuckier 20:45, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Ooh, you made me look it up! I thought Stamford, then Hartford, but sure enough, recent population shows New Haven a whopping 300 people or so ahead of Hartford. :) The top few cities are pretty close in size...

--Jinjyaa 08:32, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Damn, it was the last thing I posted before there was a talk page archiving. See stats there.--Loodog 03:22, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New Amsterdam and New Haven

The conflict between New Amsterdam and Connecticut is well documented in Russell Shorto's new book, The Island at the Center of the World. Shorto uses many sources recently translated from long-lost archives. New Haven was merged into Connecticut because the Connecticut Colony gained a royal charter that year to control "all the land between Massachusetts and Virginia, extending to the Pacific" - this was done as a pretext for the takeover of the Dutch colony. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.2.247.162 (talk) 01:35, 27 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Elms in the Elm City

I don't understand (and definitely disagree with) the desire to assert that New Haven didn't really lose its elm trees, or that plantings of other trees and disease-resistant elms have restored the condition that formerly existed. The simple fact is that New Haven's nickname derives from a condition that no longer exists, and that is the main point of the sentence about the loss of the elms. (Almost all of the elms died. Planting oaks, maples, ash trees, etc., will not restore it.) If you have never seen the aesthetic effect of a city street with a canopy of healthy mature elm trees (what New Haven formerly had), check out this photo. Also see before-and-after pictures from Detroit; before and after the Dutch elm disease hit there.--orlady 17:47, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

re the photos; Wow. Gzuckier 18:38, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
Thank you, Orlady. You've made the point better than I could have. For those of you familiar with modern New Haven, check out these photos from the Yale manuscript collection. Jd2718 00:22, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

The city of New Haven still has a very active Elm tree planting program and a more healthy tree canopy than most American cities. The New Haven Green is now covered with mature elms. Because of city programs, the nadir of the elm tree disease in New Haven was in the early 1900s, not the mid-1900s as some people would suggest. Furthermore, maples, oaks, and ash trees were planted along with Elm trees stretching back to the early 1800s. To suggest that maples, oaks, etc are "replacing" the Elms is highly misleading. User: New Haven Historian.

Yes. If there is a debate on this it should be discussed in a subsection. Some people would argue that the replanted trees, and the non-elm species that have further matured since the 1930s (such as the "LINCOLN OAK" on the New Haven Green) are much larger than any of the 1800s or 1930s trees ever were. The fact that New Haven is the "Elm City", however, is not debatable. So let's just state that at the beginning of the article. --Syrcsemark

There is an online article in the Yale Alumni Magazine, The Elm City: Then and Now, that describes the situation and provides photos of elms at various dates. It confirms the replanting of elms on the green, but I continue to contend that the abundance of elms that gave the city its nickname are gone. The story of the elm demise is complicated, but I still would date the most significant die-off as the one in mid-century:

In the 1890s and again in 1908, the city was invaded by elm-leaf beetles, an accidentally introduced species from Europe with a voracious appetite for foliage. ...Roots were damaged as streets were excavated for gas lines and water mains and paved to carry automobile traffic. Many trees were removed when electric lines were installed.... Dutch elm disease, the trees' most infamous enemy, came in two stages. The first began in 1933, when the fungus Ophiostoma ulmi, which causes the disease, appeared in Connecticut. ...In this initial iteration, the fungus spread slowly. Far more damaging was the 1938 hurricane, which brought down 13,500 trees in New Haven alone, many of them elms weakened by disease. Then came the second wave of Dutch elm disease, a new and more virulent species that arose in the Midwest in the 1940s and went on to devastate elms throughout the country. Only some two dozen survived on the New Haven Green. At its nadir, the famously shady Green had become a sunny lawn. In 1988 the New York Times wrote that, for many decades, "the Elm City title has been a hollow one."

The replanting of elms, especially on the green, is impressive (judging from photos like this one ) and deserves a mention, but not in the introduction to the article; tell about it later on. --orlady 03:40, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

This is a silly debate, because the trees planted around New Haven right now are much taller and more mature than they ever were in the 1930s. This is especially apparent if you go around some of the neighborhoods, but even on the New Haven Green, too. If they were not, the City would have long ago abandoned its nickname. Maybe it should be called the "Large Tree City" but "Elm City" is definitely not a misnomer. -Syrcsemark

[edit] Densest downtowns?

A few problems with "one of the densest downtowns" statement:

  1. I cannot find any verification that New Haven's downtown has a density of 6000/km2.
  2. We're talking about 6936 people, so the area in question is a half mile by half mile, anyway; I don't know if densities mean anything at that level of granularity.
  3. I cannot find any verification that 6000/km2 would be one of the densest downtowns in the country. I can think of 20 cities off the top of my head that would be good candidates for higher downtown densities, particularly if you allow "downtown" to be defined over a tailored enough region.
  4. The density in question is residential density, which has more to do with the function of a neighborhood than its compactness.--Loodog 04:02, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
You are right, esp in regard to the tailored region. Whatever numbers we have will almost perforce be non-comparable. Also, in general we should be careful of superlatives. Jd2718 04:11, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

The information is in the City of New Haven's Comprehensive Plan Report, Downtown Section, which is available from the City Plan Department website. The report is dated 2003. The information in the report comes from a Federal source discussing CBDs and directly compares New Haven with cities with lower downtown densities - such as Denver.

To address your other points, CBD densities are very important because they show the residential quality of the business district. The higher the residential compactness, the more likely late-night businesses will open, and also the greater percentage of corporate employees who will be able to walk to work. New Haven may be a typical downtown in terms of luncheonettes, etc., but if you look at the number of 24-hour businesses, delis and all the other places open until 2 a.m. or later, it is highly unusual. This is just a side effect of it having one of the densest residential downtowns in the United States, but is of secondary importance just to the fact that New Haven does have a unique mix of businesses and high-density housing at its center.

-Syrcsemark

I still have the following problems:
  1. Page 3 of the referenced report steps down a bit from declaring an unequivocal fact, "A recent Fannie Mae report indicates that New Haven's downtown population exceeds that of larger cities".
  2. Also says "... by population density [New Haven]is...ahead of well-known residential downtowns like Seattle, Chicago, and Baltimore." Any definition of "downtown" and "density" that puts New Haven ahead of Chicago (which has twice its density) is doing a piss-poor job of measuring numbers of 24-hour businesses, late-night delis, and other effects of density.
  3. We're still looking at an area of 1/4 acre. I could pick a block in Chicago and compare that density to all the world, declaring it to be the highest. For example, Dwight, as a neighborhood, has a higher density than downtown.
This being said, I would have no trouble with what the statement is apparently trying to say, "New Haven is a residentially centralized city," though even here superlatives should be avoided.--Loodog 00:18, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Syrcsemark: 1) The densities are clearly listed. 2) New Haven has a surprisingly large number of residential services for a downtown of its size. Chicago is a dense city, but its downtown area is given over to business services rather than residents. 3) It is a much larger area than 1/4 acre. You could not pick a block in Chicago and compare it, because that block would not be a CBD (Central Business District). The definitions of Central Business Districts (downtowns) are quite clear, and by that measure, New Haven has one of the highest population densities of any CBD - just like Manhattan or San Francisco.
Responding:
  1. Acreage: 6000/km2, population of 6936 = approx 1km2 = 1/4 acre.
  2. To say "New Haven has a surprisingly large number of residential services for a downtown of its size" is a bit like saying New Haven is big for its size.
  3. The purpose of my "one block" comment wasn't to denote the arbitrariness of the choice of region, but to illustrate just how small the area being considered is.
Again, I feel the accurate message would be "New Haven has a particularly residential CBD." or "New Haven is a residentially centralized city.", rather than "New Haven is very dense."--Loodog 03:38, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
This really fails the "So what?" test. Jd2718 03:17, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
There are more than 6936 people living downtown (you are using a differently calculated source) and the area in question is far more than 1/4 acre in size (your calculations are way, way off - just the area of the New Haven Green itself is about 17 acres). - Syrcsemark
My fault. Naive unit conversion: 4000m2 is not 4km2. Should be 1km2 = 1,000,000m2 = 250acres. Still, according to page 5 of this report, area is .47 mi2=1.2km2, pop is 6936. A seven minute walk, from side to side. Four Manhattan city blocks. Points 1, 2, and 3 still hold.--Loodog 05:53, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, a final vote and then we change the article: For discarding the "densest downtowns" statement

Agree
  • I agree, for reason above. The densest downtowns statement is misleading and doesn't mean much as a statistic.--Loodog 21:23, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Agree, discard. New Haven is New Haven, with a compact downtown and a university campus immediately adjacent, and some mixed zoning. The superlative is silly. Jd2718 21:53, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Disagree
  • The statistic is a valid one, fundamental to the nature of the city, and is highlighted by the City Planning department, among others, as an important characteristic that sets New Haven apart from other, much more spread-out cities. New Haven is so dense because it is so old. That deserves to be pointed out. -Syrcsemark
Comment: Overall density is dependent on age and city size and it is a measure of how "spread-out" a city is. Residential CBD density is not. Again, why this is misleading.--Loodog 16:49, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Changed, let me know how you like.--Loodog 14:47, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Decline/renewal

I understand in the modern history section editor's may prefer to avoid negative words, but can we really not talk about the development of slums? And instead of "a few neighborhoods" or "some central areas" can we name the places? Jd2718 07:00, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

a reader: slums are not developed, they are a relative judgement by the elite about areas with older housing stock and/or immigrants. many areas of New Haven once termed slums, like Wooster Square's Court Street, are now considered gentrified areas for the rich. they are just townhouses - it's just that in the 50s, they were filled with italian immigrants or blacks and were cheap, and now they are a million dollars each and filled with yuppies. the same is true today with some people considering immigrant-rich sections of fair haven (a beautiful waterfront neighborhood) a slum, others considering it a very vibrant and politically active neighborhood with great food. if it has the trajectory of other areas once considered slums, in a couple of decades it will also be an area with million-dollar, waterfront homes. in other words, you can not generalize about the creation of slums without an extremely thorough analysis of each neighborhood, which would be impossible in a wikipedia page. the only thorough treatment i have seen of the topic is an article by a Yale Law Professor, which is about 100 pages long.

[edit] Readded Intro Info

I have readded the introduction information that was delated. FootBall was invented by Walter Camp in New Haven. The Frisbee was also made in NH. Eli Whitney started his production facility in NH and preformed all his work in NH, the intro doesn't say he was born in NH. The pizza and hamberger invention are listed as claims and not facts. Both claims do have substance and are well known aspects of NH. I do not see why any of this information was deleted. Chtirrell 02:34, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

"but also lays claim to being the birthplace of American football, the Frisbee flying toy, the nation's first defense contractor and large-scale interchangeable parts manufacturer (Eli Whitney), and, according to the proprietors' claims, both American pizza (see Frank Pepe Pizzeria Napoletana) and the modern hamburger (see Louis' Lunch)."
To me, that reads "NH is the birthplace of football, frisbees, and Eli Whitney". Everything a city "claims" shouldn't be in an intro, but rather real information about it.--Loodog 03:34, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Shakespear lady

Does anyone think this should include something regarding Margaret Holloway "The Shakespeare Lady" ?

[edit] Architecture

Very skeptical of the "tallest buildings" section. I think there are quite a few buildings in the downtown that are taller than Harkness Tower, much as I love it!--AaronM 18:36, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

source used in article. Though I've often known emporis to have details wrong, I generally accept their ranking. If you can find a better source, go for it!--Loodog 03:49, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
Edit: in fact, Harkness Tower is only the 5th tallest. So you're right. I guess the article's been fixed since you mentioned it.--Loodog 03:50, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The photos section

Maybe this is just me, but I don't think there should be a photo section: it needlessly lengthens the article and other cities don't have it. Also, not having a photos section provides impetus to use scrutiny in the pictures that are used in the article.--Loodog 03:11, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

I've seen the galleries removed from a bunch of location articles recently, really all that is needed is a link to the Commons category with the images in it.. I'm not sure all the images on the page now are in the category, or even on Commons.. --Versageek 03:37, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] any place for this photo?

I would love to find a place in the article for this photo, although it may be overkill.. the panorama's don't work well as thumbnails or infoboxes.. any ideas? --Versageek 00:33, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I love it!!!!!!!!! -anon —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 155.212.44.108 (talk) 12:39, August 21, 2007 (UTC)

[edit] one of the earliest examples of colonial city planning in the Americas

1. This is certainly a debatable point. 2. It probably constitutes OR. 3. It does not add appreciably to the article.

The two sources provided are: 1. Yahoo... 2. A curriculum guide. This has two problems: a) it looks like the work of a single teacher. AFAI can tell, the institute hosts, it does not write or endorse; and b) it doesn't actually make the claim it is being cited for.

The phrase and supporting references should be deleted. Jd2718 (talk) 03:08, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

There is some mention about being a planned city here and here. If anyone has access to these books, it might be a suitable reference. --Polaron | Talk 03:17, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Also a journal article: J. Archer, "Puritan Town Planning in New Haven," Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 34, 140 (l975). --Polaron | Talk 03:23, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Actually, I already deleted the curriculum since that qualifies as a personal website. The yahoo travel guide is fine, and has a publisher. New Haven, with its Nine Squares layout did indeed have intention in the city design. I've argued with this article's regular contributors as to whether this constitutes "urban planning", and what we've come up with is that it's "arguably" one of the earliest examples of urban planning in the Americas.--Loodog (talk) 03:19, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
The curriculum at http://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1997/4/97.04.01.x.html is not a self-published site. It belongs to The Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute, which (according to the website) "is an educational partnership between Yale University and the New Haven Public Schools designed to strengthen teaching and learning in local schools and, by example, in schools across the country." This material does have an author's name on it, but it is not a self-published book, personal website, blog, or the like. The material was posted 10 years ago with the intent that it be used as school curriculum. If it weren't "up to snuff," the highly reputable website owner (Yale) could have taken it off the website during those 10 years. In contrast, the reference that you consider reliable is anything but. It's a Yahoo online travel guide that provides no clue as to the source or authorship of its content. Indeed, it's generic content that can be found all over the Internet. I found it on 11 different domains, including http://www.marriott.com/city-guide/city-insider.mi?cityId=606 , which identifies http://www.wcities.com/en/guide/gen_intro/606/guide.html as the original source. According to http://corporate.wcities.com/aboutus.html , Wcities "City information is compiled using researchers, stringer reviewers, locals and editors." On http://corporate.wcities.com/careers.html there is a recruitment ad for "Content Writers / Researchers / Sub-Editors / Language Experts (Full time)"; the main job requirements seem to be an ability to write in English and availability to work in Mumbai, India. 'Nuf said. I'm restoring the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute reference and deleting the one from the professional content provider in Mumbai. --Orlady (talk) 03:50, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
While it probably still is not a good reference, what is more relevant is that it doesn't back up the quote. The 'planned community" bit is, unfortunately, OR. Loodog's compromise (and I was part of that) is really just weasely. I understand wanting to add a superlative, but it really adds nothing to the article, and the claim is quite problematic. The whole bit, references and all, should be dropped. Jd2718 (talk) 05:41, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

This is NOT a debatable point. It is in the New Haven City Plan Department's own materials and many other books. I'm putting it back in. (user) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.235.82.21 (talk) 19:04, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

The stuff is in the article. It is in the streetscape section, and in the history section. It is too detailed for the lead. Jd2718 (talk) 19:29, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Louis' Lunch evidence

The American Folklife Center, at the Library of Congress, was founded in 1928 to archive collections of national or international significance. It is one of the world's oldest and largest repositories of cultural materials of traditional life. The web pages on the library's website are intended to be used by the public and to increase awareness of the contributions of inventors, artists, scientists, etc. Louis' Lunch donated articles, photographs, etc. to be held permanently in the archives of the Library and to be made available to the public as well as researchers.Tomticker5 (talk) 14:48, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

This needs to be cited by a reliable source to be here. Just because the evidence exists, doesn't mean it's shown here.--Loodog (talk) 18:07, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
It is cited by the Library of Congress website page dedicated to Louis' Lunch as the maker of the first steak sandwich and the hamburger in the U.S. Is the LOC not a reliable source?Tomticker5 (talk) 19:01, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Can you help me to insert a citation into the article? There are several books listed in the Louis' Lunch article but the main source for credibility is the LOC.Tomticker5 (talk) 19:20, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Oh, my fault. I failed to notice the specifics of the source cited. This is fine, though if we fail to mention the other claimants, it somewhat contradicts the Hamburger article.--Loodog (talk) 20:00, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
The wikipedia hamburger article is flawed because the editor's continue to protect these other false claims. The claim by Frank Tolbert, now deceased, that Fletch Davis invented the hamburger and brought it to the World's Fair in 1904 is just fantasy. Tolbert claims that an article in the New York Tribune newspaper, which has never been found after an exhausted search of their archives, claims a man was serving hamburgers at the fair. Tolbert says that Davis was that man, however, the article was never written. So, Tolbert lives on, in wikipedia, being made famous by his own false claim supporting Fletch Davis. While Louis' Lunch, the only place that has ever had any hard evidence, archived at the Library of Congress, continues to sell hamburger's!!Tomticker5 (talk) 13:45, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Tomticker5 is a WP:COI contributor, as he is a relative of Louis' Lunch owners and founders. He is making a number of unsourced claims about his family business, and twisting sources to support his WP:COI. Please approach his contributions with due caution. Weregerbil (talk) 19:46, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
I am not related to any Louis' Lunch owners or founders. Now, that is a good example of a straw man argumentTomticker5 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 19:50, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Is Luigi Pieragostini your great uncle? Please excuse me if I am not wholly familiar with the ownership structure of the businesses in question, however. Weregerbil (talk) 20:13, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
It is common knowledge, and a part of the history of Louis' Lunch, that it is still owned and operated by fourth generation Lassen's. I am not affiliated with, or related to, Louis' Lunch or the Lassen family in any way; I wish I was. My great Uncle invented a hinged gridiron in the early 1900s, manufactured it and patented it. That gridiron was used by many people other than Louis' Lunch BTW.Tomticker5 (talk) 20:22, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Population discrepancy

The Hartford article says that Hartford is the third-largest city in CT, but this article says that New Haven is the third largets. Which is true? Redsox4918 (talk) 02:03, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Notable New Haven natives and long-term residents

Would anyone object to removing this section and adding a link to [[Category:People from New Haven, Connecticut]]?

If there were a "List of people from New Haven, Connecticut", it might be a reasonable way to go. But linking to a category isn't terribly useful: it's far less conveniently arranged and therefore far less conveniently read, and loses all the ancillary information other than a raw list of names. You would also lose all the people listed who don't have articles of their own. Categories really can't replace lists. - Nunh-huh 04:50, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
You're absolutely right-- I had only glanced at the page and thought it was a raw list. My mistake. That being said, should we link to a list? This section does take up a substantial chunk of the page, and isn't necessarily of interest to those viewing the New Haven article. Fullobeans (talk) 07:51, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
If the page gets a lot longer, it might be worthwhile splitting out, but as of now it's only 71KB, not at all oversized for an article on a major city (NYC is 113, Cleveland 80). - Nunh-huh 18:34, 28 March 2008 (UTC)