Talk:St. Louis, Missouri

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the St. Louis, Missouri article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (`~~~~`). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability
Archives: 1, 2, 3

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Missouri (Rated B-Class)

Missouri Portal

This article is part of WikiProject Missouri, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Missouri. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.

Top

This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

WikiProject Cities (Rated B-Class)
	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.)
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the priority scale.

WikiProject St. Louis (Rated B-Class)
	This article is within the scope of WikiProject St. Louis, a project to build and improve articles related to St. Louis and the surrounding metropolitan area. We invite you to join the project and contribute to the discussion.
	B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
	Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

WikiProject France (Rated B-Class)

France Portal

St. Louis, Missouri is within the scope of WikiProject France, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.

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, explaining the ratings and/or suggest improvements.)

1 Keep this article about ST LOUIS
2 WikiProject St. Louis
3 St. Louis-related AfD
4 Skyline Pics
5 Crime section POV
6 External Link for Review and Possible Inclusion
7 Transporation in St Louis merge into this article
8 Requested move
9 New Airport
10 Nicknames
11 official beer

[edit] Keep this article about ST LOUIS

There are many different details throughout the article about attractions in nearby cities, especially in St. Louis county. This article is about the attractions in ST LOUIS city. I am sorry if there was a split, but keep the attractions like DelMar and Clayton in their respective cities articles, the article about the MSA, or the article about St. Louis county. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.230.246.141 (talk) 20:59, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject St. Louis

Would anybody be interested creating a coalition to form a WikiProject St. Louis. Both Kansas City and Columbia have WikiProject and seeing as there are more St. Louis related pages on Wikipedia than either of those I think it would benefit the creation and growth of St. Louis-related articles. See WikiProject Columbia and WikiProject Kansas City for ideas. Grey Wanderer | Talk 23:29, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Seems like I good idea. I'm all for it.- thank you Astuishin (talk) 06:24, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Count me in. Gamer83 12:22, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Great, if we can get 3 or 4 more people I'll go ahead and start it. Grey Wanderer | Talk 19:42, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Done! It's located at Wikipedia:WikiProject St. Louis.Grey Wanderer | Talk 20:21, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] St. Louis-related AfD

Some watchers of this page may be interested in commenting on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St. Louis-area English. Deor 19:17, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Skyline Pics

I added a panoramic skyline picture I took Labor Day Weekend to the STL main page. There are an excessive amount of skyline pictures already but I think this extremely high resolution picture compliments the article well. Feel free to edit the caption. Buphoff 15:40, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

St. Louis Skyline taken from East St. Louis.

Very nice! Grey Wanderer | Talk 16:04, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Agreed- thank you Astuishin (talk) 01:23, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Crime section POV

The Crime section is POV -- all it does is attack published studies and data.

Agreed. An NPOV tag was added because tt is so slanted. (I live there, so I wish things were as glossy as the article makes it out to be...) Roscoestl (talk) 02:43, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

The references are fine, but the wording needs to be fixed. Instead of letting the facts speak for themselves, the section tends to try and explain things away or come to conclusions based on the facts. Let me see what I can do. --Jdcaust (talk) 15:44, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Alright, I NPOVified the crime stats and updated the references. I also removed the no looting section for three reasons. One, it assumes that high crime statistics lead to looting, which isn't necessarily true and smells of original research. Two, the reference itself mentions this in one line amongst tons of updates about the storm over several days. It was simply brought up by the police as a fact correction over what the national media had apparently reported. If the article was actually about how notable having no looting was, I would understand. Finally, once I removed the POV statement about how this is "proof of St. Louis' stability," the mention seemed totally out of place with the rest of the section. With these changes, I removed the POV tag. Also, as a side note, I also fixed the pictures so that they didn't give the paragraphs strange spacing issues. --Jdcaust (talk) 16:19, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] External Link for Review and Possible Inclusion

St. Louis Online

I would like to mention a website for possible inclusion in the external links section. This is in line with the conflict of interest guidelines as I am the owner of the website. I ask that independent and neutral Wikipedia editors decide whether to add it to the external links section of this article.

This website is the subject of the article, requires no payment or registration and is accessable to users. This site does not use java navigation, cookies, nor flash.

This website contains meaningful, relevant content that can not be included in the article, mainly because of fast paced content changes in RSS feeds. These include but are not limited to: Local Sports, Local Weather, Regional Weather, Severe Weather Warnings and Watches, Local News and much more.

This site was created to be useful, tasteful, informative, and factual. It rounds out the Wikipedia article with content about the subject of the article that is not static, but up to the minute as it is happening. This site is directly related to the subject of the article and I would ask that you please consider it for addition to the external links section.

Frankolive (talk) 13:37, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Your link provides nothing unique or notable for the STL wikipage. Also, That link is laiden with advertisements....it's clear what your motivation is for wanting that link posted. As a side note, never edit the talkpage history....Gamer83 (talk) 16:39, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm gonna have to say no as well.Grey Wanderer | Talk 17:35, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Transporation in St Louis merge into this article

Support That article and the section here are highly similar, and to the extent they differ is better written here. Jon (talk) 00:39, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Support There is certainly enough material to justify a separate St. Louis Transpiration article, but until someone writes it with good sources, I vote to merge it.Grey Wanderer | Talk 23:49, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Support Echo Grey Wanderer Roscoestl (talk) 02:44, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Support Per reasons above. --Jdcaust (talk) 16:24, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was not to move --Lox (t,c) 10:22, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

St. Louis currently redirects to St. Louis, Missouri. The Wikipedia naming comventions suggest a limited number of cities be located at simply "city" instead of "city, state" if they are the primary topic for that name. Since the redirect is to St. Louis, It is safe to assume that it is. This would not affect the disambig page at Saint Louis. The list was formed based on the AP Stylebook. This would be congruent with Chicago and New York City and also be aligned with the philosophy: The simpler the better.Grey Wanderer | Talk 04:32, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

support per nom. Yahel Guhan 04:40, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Oppose. The general usage, as specified by the guideline Wikipedia:Naming conventions (settlements), is for U.S. city artuicles to be named "city, state". Thousands of articles are named this way and there is no special reason why this article should be named any other way. BTW, I would support moving "Chicago" back to "Chicago, Illinois" and moving "New York City" to "New York, New York" if anyone decides to request them. TJ Spyke 11:19, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Comment Please read all of the naming conventions, especially the part that says: "Cities listed in the AP Stylebook as not requiring the state modifier may be listed at City if they are the primary topic for that name. Cities that meet these criteria are: Atlanta, Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Dallas, Denver, Detroit, Honolulu, Houston, Indianapolis, Los Angeles, Miami, Milwaukee, Minneapolis, New Orleans, New York City, Oklahoma City, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, Salt Lake City, San Antonio, San Diego, San Francisco, Seattle. No other city should be listed at City."Grey Wanderer | Talk 11:21, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Many of those cities listed have had move requests (off the top of my head: Houston, Seattle, Boston, Atlanta) and they all failed even when the city name redirected (like how Seattle redirects to Seattle, Washington). I have gone into more detail in those various move requests and just didn't feel like repeating myself here. I can dig up my old comments tomorrow if you want. I have said before that I think that any country that has states/provinces should not have city articles wiht just the city name (i.e. it should be "Toronto, Ontario" and "London, England"). —Preceding unsigned comment added by TJ Spyke (talk • contribs) 11:29, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Oppose - "St. Louis" may refer to the saint. Since so many American toponyms aren't original, they should be kept with their state disambiguators if they are slightly ambiguous. Reginmund (talk) 14:45, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Indifference and note - you will never get this passed without first getting everyone to agree to a move of ALL cities in AP Stylebook. You'll have to start another proposal for a set of moves of the cities you mention. What you're doing here is futile.--Loodog (talk) 15:49, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Oppose per core of Wikipedia:Naming conventions (settlements). Recent changes say "Cities listed in the AP Stylebook as not requiring the state modifier may be listed at City..." but not must. What compelling reason is there for St Louis to depart from the standard US city format? — AjaxSmack 20:18, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Oppose per numerous previous discussions and consensus for US cities. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:44, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Oppose. Goes against naming conventions for US towns and cities. – Axman (☏) 17:16, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Support per nom thanks Astuishin (talk) 04:18, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
- And exactly how does the current setup not give you the expected result? Is there any reason to ignore naming guidelines for this city? Vegaswikian (talk) 08:06, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Support, as per nominator. As a non-American, when St Louis is mentioned I immediately think this city. 203.94.135.134 (talk) 03:28, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

[edit] New Airport

I've cut the following unsourced paragaph per wiki is not a crystal ball: "In early 2008, plans to build another international airport in the St. Louis area began. American Airlines has had recent interest of making Lambert-St. Louis International Airport its main hub, and is offering to let the other airlines all be in the new airport. City and county officials decided that Oakville, Missouri would be home to the new international airport. The name for the new airport is still unknown, but some mentioned names were: Oakville-St. Louis International Airport, St. Louis International Airport South, and Double-River International Airport. Oakville is a highly populated area, and enimate domain would be the only answer to get the land needed. This project is to begin in mid to late 2009, with an estimated finishing date of 2014. With the new airport, more international flights will fly in and out of St. Louis. The new airport will hold large planes auch as the Boeing 767, Boeing 777, Boeing 787, Airbus 330, Airbus 340, Airbus 350, and the Airbus 380." Jon (talk) 21:40, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I too have cut this.....again I guess. I have not heard of anything like this, not to mention how silly it is! Why would the St. Louis Metro area need yet another airport when Lambert isn't even near capacity! Not to even mention empty Mid-America airport across the river. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.43.243.69 (talk) 02:18, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't know, but it's probably been added to the Oakville, Missouri page again as well. I put the {{Fact}} tag in the second go-round in hopes of avoiding a revert war, but... --Umrguy42 (talk) 05:03, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

It's still there and it is still completely bogus. It needs to be kept out permanently. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mark Reichert (talk • contribs) 19:08, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm from Oakville and have never heard of this. All the land that's not river bluff or flood plain has pretty much been developed, and the use of eminent domain here would be suicide. This is not even to mention the fact the airports in the St. Louis area are already completely adequate.--63.76.151.103 (talk) 16:31, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Nicknames

St.louis is also called the, "Show me State." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.90.165.36 (talk) 19:41, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Missouri is called the "Show me State." St. Louis is in Missouri.-Grey Wanderer | Talk 22:27, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] official beer

I added a comment to the economy section discussing Anheuser-Busch to note that legislation has been proposed to make Budweiser the official beer of the State of Missouri. See St. Louis Post-Dispatch article from 3/10/08 and Missouri House Bill 2297 at http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills081/biltxt/intro/HB2297I.htm. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.165.95.5 (talk) 16:26, 11 March 2008 (UTC)