Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Charlotte

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.
NA This page is not an article and does not require a rating on the quality scale.


Shortcut:
WT:CLT

This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Charlotte, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Charlotte. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

Contents

[edit] Neighborhood naming standards

Since Neighborhoods in Charlotte is the only open task at this moment, I'd like to propose some standards for naming articles. Right now it's an inconsistent mess, and I'll argue that it is incorrect. Before we argue about which neighborhoods deserve a listing, lets clean up how we're organizing what we've already got.

  • Inconsistent
  • Incorrect?
  • Duplicates
At this moment, Quail Hollow has the exact same content as Quail Hollow, Charlotte, North Carolina, but they are two separate articles which will differ as people edit one and not the other. There should only be one valid article and the other article should be changed to a redirect.
  • Misleading
  • There may be others but I recently changed the name of the article on Steele Creek from Steele Creek, Charlotte, North Carolina to just Steele Creek, North Carolina because it was misleading. This can be discussed further on that article's discussion page but since 1/3 of Steele Creek is not within Charlotte it was incorrect. I don't know if any other neighborhoods may have similarly misleading article titles but those that do should be corrected.

My suggestion is to have a standard which applies to most of the neighborhoods (although some may be exceptions to the rules). I suggest

  1. Remove ", Charlotte, North Carolina" from any neighborhoods which are not recognized as an independent CDP by the Census Bureau. (This may possibly apply to all neighborhoods except Steele Creek, North Carolina.) For example, Plaza-Midwood, Charlotte, North Carolina will become simply Plaza-Midwood. This is common practice, as evidenced by Harlem and Greenwich Village.
  2. IF a shortened neighborhood name conflicts with any other article on Wikipedia then it should be treated like it would be in a disambiguation situation. I don't know if this applies to any neighborhoods currently in this project but, for example if "Fakeville" were also a town in FakeState, you may add " (neighborhood)" to the title. This is also common practice when necessary, for example Observatory Circle (neighborhood) and Skyway (neighborhood)

Discussion? --Fife Club 16:05, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

P.S. To "change" the name of an article you create the article with the new name and then copy and paste all the content from the original article into it. Then go back to the original article and replace all text with #REDIRECT [[name of new article]]. Viola.

P.P.S. Later we can discuss which neighborhoods even belong in this project. (I for one don't see how The Arboretum, Charlotte, North Carolina can possibly count as a neighborhood. It's a shopping center. The neighborhood would be "South Charlotte".) But first things first. --Fife Club 16:05, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

The whole Charlotte neighorbhoods problem started when a few editors didn't like the unsourced section called Neighborhoods in the Charlotte, North Carolina article. It was deleted, restored, deleted, then restored as a list... then made into a list with a short one-line intro with links. So far, no complaints, so it seems like its going to stay a while like that. What did this result in? Numerous new articles were created for all the Charlotte neighborhoods and people who lived in Charlotte sqeezed the Internet dry for enough information to keep their articles from being deleted. So, now, we have a mess, and its going to take some time to clean up. Which ones should stay and which should be deleted? Ok, we can hold off that discussion until later.
I agree there needs to be some uniformity for the titles. There's no real standard and there have been similar debates at WP:LOCAL and elsewhere, so I agree with Fife Club's proposal. The "Funkytown, Charlotte, North Carolina" style was probably derived from the way some unincorporated communities are disambiguated (i.e. Mount Olive, Stokes County, North Carolina). I like the "(neighborhood)" disambiguation style better. If by any chance the there are two neighborhoods in two different cities with the same name we may have to use "(Charlotte neighborhood)", which should be fine. --Triadian 18:29, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
I agree wholeheartedly with Fife Club's naming proposal as well for the reasons explained. Although can't a name change be done via the move tab? That would probably be easier, and the preferred medium as it carries the article's history--important if there are multiple contributors. While we are on the topic, another naming convention we may want to consider is for lists and categories. Mainly concerning the comma-North Carolina addendum. And no, this doesn't come from any ill feelings toward the NC attachment. :) Rather, that it is aesthetically unpleasing to scroll through a page and see half with it and half without it. I propose they all be "in Charlotte" or "of Charlotte", period, for the same reason that http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlotte redirects you to Charlotte, and I will happily change Charlotte-related lists and categories to conform to this if no one disagrees.
As far as the neighborhoods section within the Charlotte article itself goes, I have been looking through different city articles, and many have a section entitled "Cityscape", which describes in prose form how the city is divided, well-known neighboring communities, and landmarks such as skyscrapers. Los Angeles is an example. A list is okay for now, but something like the above would be ideal (see WP:EMBED). It will have to wait to be done though until we sort out which neighborhoods are notable and sourced. — aegreen (talk • email) 20:50, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
I don't have any problem with the "in Charlotte" or "of Charlotte" convention for lists and/or categories. --Triadian 20:14, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Before this project tries to do a mass renaming, you name want to review the discussion on neighborhood naming conventions. Whatever this project decides should be based on the guideline from the settlement naming project. Vegaswikian 23:56, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I've started a discussion on the topic of city neighborhoods. Maybe within a week there will be some useful feedback. If not, then we'll just go with whatever fits us best. I took the liberty of moving the pages prior to Vegaswikian's comment. --Triadian 20:14, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Neighborhood boundaries

As a personal, non-wikipedia pet project I've been mapping some Charlotte neighborhoods on to an interactive Google Map. Here's the link. If you click on a neighborhood "shape" it may display the source of the map boundaries if available. Again, this map is not part of any Wikipedia project but if you'd like, you may link to this map in the various Wikipedia articles for these Charlotte neighborhoods. Hint: You can zoom in to more targeted neighborhood views and create a new link to those views by clicking "link to this page". There are still many neighborhoods that I can't find specific known boundaries for. If you know of detailed, documented neighborhood boundaries not already on this map, please reply below or contact me on my user talk page and I'll add that neighborhood to the map. Thanks. --Fife Club 15:27, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Charlotte Route 4

Should anything be changed or added before I nominate this as a good article? --NE2 04:28, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merge North Charlotte & NoDa

In my opinion NoDa and North Charlotte should be merged into a single North Charlotte article with a section specifically on NoDa since NoDa is a PART of the greater North Charlotte neighborhood per CWAC designations. Thoughts? Patriarca12 23:00, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I think that is a bad idea. By that logic, Ballyntine, Quail Hollow, and South Park should all be lumped together as South Charlotte. Also by this logic, there would only be 4 neighborhoods in the entire city; North, East, West, and South. I don't think we should confuse identifiable neighborhoods with where they happen to fall geographically (although that would be a great means of organizing a list of all Charlotte neighborhoods). I would say this about any real neighborhoods, but Noda's in particular has far too unique of an identity to be confused with "North Charlotte".
Also, I don't understand why you mentioned the CWAC designations. That "North Charlotte" that you linked to is a very, very small subsection of town - less than 576 acres! According to that map, nothing along any of WT Harris, nor the Northlake Mall, nor the University area considered to be in North Charlotte. More importantly to your argument, Noda is no where near that little sliver of land that CWAC calls North Charlotte. CWAC designations are usualy just collections of neighboring subdivisions for statistical purposes only.
--Fife Club 02:33, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
P.S. I would completely argue that "North Charlotte" isn't really a neighborhood anyway, and shoulld not be considered a "neighborhood" in this project. It's just a whole side of town, what contains dozens of real neighborhoods, like University City, Derita, and others.
North Charlotte is a separate neighborhood that includes NoDa. The CWAC map clearly shows the area of East 36th and North Davidson, the center of NoDa, as part of the neighborhood. Additionally, the moniker North Charlotte is based on the old Highland Mill operations there and is also noted on the National Register of Historic Places as the North Charlotte Historic District. Yes Druid Hills, Northlake, University City, etc. could be consider a part of North Charlotte in a more regional sense, but not in a neighborhood sense. When speaking specifically of neighborhoods NoDa is part of the larger North Charlotte neighborhood. Patriarca12 16:34, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
My bad on reading the map wrong. But still, the CWAC maps are often inconsistent with real neighborhoods so they shouldn't be taken verbatim. For example:
  • Steele Creek is shown as just a tiny fraction of what the real Steele Creek neighborhood actually is.
  • Dilworth's CWAC map doesn't match the well documented historic district boundaries of Dilworth
  • South Park, South End, and NoDa doesn't even exist according to CWAC but they're all obviously real and thriving neighborhoods.
So the real question we have to decide first is definition of what what constitutes a neighborhood? I would say that the people in a neighborhood identify their own neighborhood (such as registered Historic Districts, or the fact that somebody living off of WT Harris would say they live in North Charlotte), and not just go by the faulty CWAC maps. If on the other hand we do decide that only the CWAC maps matter than we'll have to be consistent and remove articles such as South Park, South End and NoDa because they're not recognized as such bt CWAC. Just my 8 cents. --Fife Club 17:28, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
You do raise an excellent point about parts of town like University City, SouthPark, South End, etc. that do not necessarily fall into a single CWAC designation that are locally well known and established. Maybe we can note them as something like "zones" and note what neighborhoods are located within each (i.e. SouthPark encompasses the neighborhoods of Beverly Woods, Barclay Downs, Sharon Woods and Foxcroft).
Personally, if we are to create articles about individual neighborhoods, I feel CWAC/NSA designations should be used as they are all officially defined and mapped by the city. However, I will be fine with any consensus that can be reached on the issue. Patriarca12 22:56, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
I agree. CWAC and NSA designations can often be useful information to include in a neighborhood article, especially since it's an official and documented government designation. I just personally favor community consensus (what people really consider a neighborhood) over stricty going by those maps. Your example of mentioning which CWAC neighborhoods are considered to be part of the SouthPark neighborhood would constitute valuable content for that article. Getting back to NoDa, I still don't think it should be embedded within a North Charlotte article but by all means mention those facts in both articles. --Fife Club 15:37, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] LYNX Rapid Transit Services

Would y'all take a look at the LYNX article I have been working on and let me know if anything should be changed or added before I nominate this as a good article? Patriarca12 22:45, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

That is a very impressive article, seriously. Excellent job! A particularly good job with your proper use of citations (and multiple instances of the same citations) - something rarely done correctly in Wikipedia. The only suggestion I have is to check with the Village Pump as to whether the use of colorizing text for aesthetic reasons (to match the line color) may possibly conflict with any Wikipedia policy. I like the idea but you may want to just check on that before you nominate the article. Again, great job. --Fife Club 16:02, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed deletion: Another Choice for Black Children Adoption Agency

Another Choice for Black Children Adoption Agency (via WP:PROD)

--User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 01:22, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Why is this here? Are you looking for support on the proposed deletion? And what case are you making, for or against? I don't get why this was posted here? I'll chime in on this if somebody can provide a link to the proper discussion page (which is not here at Wikipedia:WikiProject Charlotte). --Fife Club 04:41, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
This is here as notification of a proposed deletion relevant to Charlotte, North Carolina. I am neutral on the matter of the article itself. If you do not want to be notified in relation to Charlotte-related article dispositions, I won't place anything here in the future. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 12:28, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
No problem. No harm was done by mentioning it. Although I think this project is primarily focused on the Charlotte, North Carolina article and other articles related to the city itself, it's just that I can't figure out anything that we can do about it anyway. I can't find any discussions on the proposal and all it says is that the "owner" of the article can simply remove the tag is they don't want it removed (and they don't even need to justify their reasoning). Personally I've got to agree with the template that, although it's great work that they're doing, the article is about a non-notable organization so the article is against Wikipedia guidelines. Besides that, no other articles link to it other than some talk pages, so it's an orphan article anyway. (Absolutely no pun intended at all!) Just my 2 cents but I'm not going to lose sleep either way. --Fife Club 17:06, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
I have a habit of trying to find the most specific WikiProject that might have perspective on whether or not an article should be deleted or improved; local notability is best judged and sources found to support it by persons living in or with great interest in that locale (in general). You've described the functional scope of this project as quite narrow; so I'll plan to go to Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/North Carolina with similar notifications in the future. Thanks for the clarification. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:17, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, I removed the PROD and added some content and citations that I believe help establish notability. At any rate, it'll have to go to an Afd now if someone really wants to delete it. Shawn in Montreal 16:08, 10 November 2007 (UTC)