Talk:Edina, Minnesota: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 18:37, 5 March 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Edina, Minnesota article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1: 3 months

Minnesota Mid‑importance

	Minnesota portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Minnesota, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Minnesota on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MinnesotaWikipedia:WikiProject MinnesotaTemplate:WikiProject MinnesotaMinnesota
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities

This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

John Reinan (4 February 2015). "Edina's racist history is focus of Wikipedia 'edit war'". Star Tribune. Retrieved 4 February 2015. Edina's history of racial discrimination is the focus of an "edit war" on Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia that's become the world's go-to research site. Eight times last summer and autumn, a university student added information to Edina's Wikipedia page about the city's history of racial exclusion. And each time, the same anonymous Wikipedia editor removed the information.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Edina, Minnesota. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:46, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Edina, Minnesota. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.census.gov/geo/www/gazetteer/files/Gaz_places_national.txt
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110718122320/http://www.ci.edina.mn.us/PDFs/L3-05_Map%20Edina_01.pdf to http://www.ci.edina.mn.us/PDFs/L3-05_Map%20Edina_01.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:45, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Edina, Minnesota. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:22, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Presidential election table

@Lakeperson and Sbmeirow: The presidential election table adds undue weight. The table features only one level of government, and avoids state and local leaders. The table is out-of-scope and overly detailed, and is not suggested at WP:USCITIES. Magnolia677 (talk) 11:23, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Magnolia677. The table as presented is ugly, it is a data-dump with no accompanying text to put it in appropriate context (presumably because no secondary sources exist), and the idea that the politics of a town are best best discussed in terms of presidential election results are highly dubious at best. --JBL (talk) 13:47, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. To parrot what I said on another discussion, I think displaying election results has encyclopedic value and can provide insight into the demographics of the town and how the party politics of an area have changed over time. While I have no problem with adding additional lists for state and local leaders, I think at the very least showing historic presidential election results as an umbrella for the political leanings of a settlement is valuable and worth keeping. I don't think we should disregard the data because it is "ugly", simply make the tables collapsible but available for those who want it. Mbdfar (talk) 18:44, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It can provide insight in the presence of proper sources that provide analysis and interpretation of the raw data. Find those sources and the objections go away. Without those sources, this is an unencyclopedic data-dump. --JBL (talk) 20:40, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@JayBeeEll: I guess I just don't understand why we need secondary interpretations of this data. We don't ask that of historical population numbers, do we? AFAIK just citing the census is considered fine. WP:USCITIES#Demographics doesn't state the need for secondary sources, just a description of the data. WP:INDISCRIMINATE does address "Excessive listings of unexplained statistics", but also just states the need for accompanying text (I wouldn't call the present listing "excessive" anyway). I guess the question that remains in my mind is; is it possible to include explanatory text providing context to this information using only primary sources? Mbdfar (talk) 21:48, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is raw data. Insight (your word) is provided by analysis of raw data. Analysis requires a secondary source, which is missing here. Without analysis, this is exactly the kind of unexplained statistical data dump that WP:INDISCRIMINATE is talking about. There are an infinite variety of raw data sources available about Edina (or any other place): dozens of kinds of weather data, dozens of kinds of demographic data, electoral data at all levels, economic data, .... Each of these could potentially provide insight into Edina, with an appropriate analysis. Secondary sources are where you find the analysis that turns this from raw data into encyclopedic coverage; they also provide guidance as to which parts of which data are actually significant, as in WP:DUE. --JBL (talk) 15:48, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I disagree. Insight can be achieved by just providing the data with a written explanation. I'm going to use the example of historic population figures again. Having a table with population data provides insight into the size and growth rate of a settlement. No secondary sources needed, just plain, easy to understand data. Why is this any different? An election results table is not complex, and with accompanying text (all that's required of WP:INDISCRIMINATE), I fail to see where in the guidelines it says that this information should be excluded. Reiterating my question from above, if an explanation using primary and reliable sources can be written without falling under WP:OR, then why shouldn't it be included? "...dozens of kinds of weather data, dozens of kinds of demographic data, electoral data at all levels, economic data, ..." Ok, if it's properly sourced, formatted appropriately, and explained in the text, then sure! We already have templates for weather data, etc, why deprecate the use of them? These aren't opinions or concepts that can be skewed, so I don't understand why you invoked WP:DUE - would you mind elaborating on what part of that page is relevant here? Mbdfar (talk) 16:22, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Magnolia677 and JayBeeEll:, I'm just requesting a response to my questions above. I'd love to come to a consensus on this. Mbdfar (talk) 15:26, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You asked ~~three~~four questions. To your first question, my answers are: it is incredibly easy to find secondary sources about populated places with longstanding census data that discuss and analyze the data, so provide something encyclopedic to say about it. To your ~~second~~third question, my answer is: see the answer to my first question. These are data sets that get discussed all the time in all sorts of sources, so they do not suffer from the same problem. With respect to your ~~third~~fourth question, here is a quotation from WP:DUE: Neutrality requires that each article or other page in the mainspace fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in the published, reliable sources. ... Undue weight can be given in several ways, including but not limited to depth of detail, quantity of text, .... The prominence of this information in published, reliable sources appears to be 0, and the coverage in the article should be proportional to that. ("Someone has written at least once about a topic in a reliable secondary source" is an extremely low bar to jump over!) --JBL (talk) 17:21, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see on re-reading that I missed one, but my response to it is covered by my response to the other three. --JBL (talk) 17:24, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Election results are as important, if not more, than demographics of a community. Lakeperson (talk) 16:21, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Election results, particularly for more than one election, provides valuable insight to a community, its values, and is certainly as important, probably even more, than racial demographics of a community, which is already included. Counties on Wikipedia have their election results shown and an entire county is incredibly vague on what that signifies for values. Secondary sources are literally in my posts directly from the Secretary of State Office. You can not get any more direct sourcing than that. The table is collapsible and if a person does not care to see it they do not have to. Recent political leanings are certainly more important than a historical event that occurred in a community 100 year ago. Lakeperson (talk) 18:52, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Magnolia677 has yet again engaged in an edit war after him and I literally just got through with one on similar matter (See, New Fairfield, CT) about the election table and his removal of it there. (Finally reached an end agreement of being collapsible suggested by @Mbdfar . before the article was protected by an admin because of our edit war ) I have learned from my mistake to not engage in this and yet Magnolia677 has once again gone back and fourth deleting this. I feel before it is deleted he should need to start a talk beforehand. Right now with his most recent severe action the whole Politics section has been wiped. It certainly does add encyclopedic value. Hopefully this will be reverted & Magnolia677 will be talked to about his actions on the site. Elvisisalive95 (talk) 22:00, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Elvisisalive95:, Magnolia677 is not your enemy. They just have a different vision for what a quality article looks like. If Wikipedia policy is on their side, their edits will prevail. That's what we are figuring out now. Please don't WP:HOUND. Mbdfar (talk) 22:11, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough & understood. Elvisisalive95 (talk) 22:58, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+{{talk header}}
-{{WikiProject Minnesota
+{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|1=
-|class=B|importance=mid}}
+{{WikiProject Minnesota|importance=mid}}
+{{WikiProject Cities}}
+}}
+{{Press
+ | subject     = article
+ | author      = John Reinan
+ | title       = Edina's racist history is focus of Wikipedia 'edit war'
+ | org         = [[Star Tribune]]
+ | url         = http://www.startribune.com/local/west/290835531.html
+ | date        = 4 February 2015
+ | quote       = Edina’s history of racial discrimination is the focus of an “edit war” on Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia that’s become the world’s go-to research site.  Eight times last summer and autumn, a university student added information to Edina’s Wikipedia page about the city’s history of racial exclusion. And each time, the same anonymous Wikipedia editor removed the information.
+ | archiveurl  =
+ | archivedate =
+ | accessdate  = 4 February 2015
+}}
+{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis
+| age=2160
+| archiveprefix=Talk:Edina, Minnesota/Archive
+| numberstart=1
+| maxarchsize=400000
+| header={{Automatic archive navigator}}
+| minkeepthreads=4
+| minarchthreads=1
+| format= %%i
+}}
+== External links modified ==
-==Sundown Towns==
+Hello fellow Wikipedians,
-I removed the following passage: "Historically Edina was a completely white "Sundown Town," as was recently revealed by the historian James W. Loewen in Sundown Towns: A Hidden Dimension of American Racism, pages 7 and 23. In such towns Black people were not allowed to spend the night for fear of being run out of town or suffering violence,"
+I have just modified {{plural:6|one external link|6 external links}} on [[Edina, Minnesota]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=755801690 my edit]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|this simple FaQ]] for additional information. I made the following changes:
-Those sentences are based on a  careless reading of Lowen's book.  Loewen does call Edina a "Sundown Town" on page 7 and 23 of his book, but in the book, the term Sundown Town is used somewhat broadly.  There is no specific indication in the book that violence generally threatened black people after dark at any time in Edina.  (If black people were in fact not allowed in Edina after dark, I would be interested to see a historical reference; Loewen does not provide one.)  The specific information on Edina in Loewen's book is about racist covenants for residents of the Country Club neighborhood (in which home-buyers in the new (early 20th cent.) development promised not to rent, lease, or sell to non-whites or to allow non-white residents other than servants), and about Edina's pioneering use of zoning ordinances to keep out low income housing.  These might be interesting topics for article inclusion, but I would suggest that someone do more careful research than can be done with Loewen's book alone.  (Loewen's book is large, but with few exceptions, the information in it on any one given town such as Edina is pretty sketchy.)
+*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110721034521/http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=DEC_10_PL_GCTPL2.ST13&prodType=table to http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=DEC_10_PL_GCTPL2.ST13&prodType=table
+*Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/64vfLAeJ2?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.census.gov%2Fgeo%2Fwww%2Fgazetteer%2Ffiles%2FGaz_places_national.txt to http://www.census.gov/geo/www/gazetteer/files/Gaz_places_national.txt
+*Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6YSasqtfX?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.census.gov%2Fprod%2Fwww%2Fdecennial.html to http://www.census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html
+*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141129082905/http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=CF to http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=CF
+*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110504031405/http://www.ci.edina.mn.us/citycouncil/HistoricContextsStudy.htm to http://www.ci.edina.mn.us/citycouncil/HistoricContextsStudy.htm
+*Added {{tlx|dead link}} tag to http://www.startribune.com/sports/twins/97126244.html?elr=KArksi8cyaiUo8cyaiUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aULPQL7PQLanchO7DiUr
+*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.startribune.com/sports/wolves/31813654.html
+When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' or '''failed''' to let others know (documentation at {{tlx|Sourcecheck}}).
-Also, Loewen's book is not a good source for the claim that Edina was at any time "all white".  From page 417: "...it seems as though there had always been a few African Americans in Grosse Pointe, Edina, or Beverly Hills."
+{{sourcecheck|checked=false}}
-Finally, I'm not sure it's correct to call [[James Loewen]] a historian.  He's a sociologist.
-[[User:Aitch-a-elel|Aitch-a-elel]] ([[User talk:Aitch-a-elel|talk]]) 03:45, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
+Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 07:46, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
-==Stereotype section==
+== External links modified ==
-This section warrants immediate and permanent removal from the article.  The information is based on heresay and adds absolutely no verifiable or valid information to the article.
+Hello fellow Wikipedians,
-the information was valid
+I have just modified 3 external links on [[Edina, Minnesota]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=792594414 my edit]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|this simple FaQ]] for additional information. I made the following changes:
-==Carl Pohlad lives in Edina?==
+*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.census.gov/geo/www/gazetteer/files/Gaz_places_national.txt
+*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html
+*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110718122320/http://www.ci.edina.mn.us/PDFs/L3-05_Map%20Edina_01.pdf to http://www.ci.edina.mn.us/PDFs/L3-05_Map%20Edina_01.pdf
+When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
-Source?  All the sources I've seen say he lives in Minneapolis.  [[User:Pfalstad|Pfalstad]] 01:30, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
+{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}}
-:Ok, so a lot of the sources cite him living in Minneapolis, MN, because a lot of people know were Minneapolis is as opposed to Edina.  Here is the source i have, and i am going to add Richard Schulze (Best Buy owner) to the list as well. [http://minneapolis.about.com/od/peoplelifestyleinterests/p/richestminnesot.htm].--[[User:Gephart|Geppy]] 04:53, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
+Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 12:45, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
-::But that source also says that Carl lives in Minneapolis.  [[User:Pfalstad|Pfalstad]] 16:13, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
+== External links modified ==
-:Wow, you must have read my mind, you already added Richard pfalstad!!  I guass i should check the article page before the talk page.--[[User:Gephart|Geppy]] 04:56, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
+Hello fellow Wikipedians,
-The source you quoted says: "Pohlad is 88 widowed, and lists '''Minneapolis''' as his home."  Not Edina.  [[User:Pfalstad|Pfalstad]] 22:21, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
+I have just modified 4 external links on [[Edina, Minnesota]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=801049665 my edit]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|this simple FaQ]] for additional information. I made the following changes:
-Carl Pohlad most certainly lives in Edina. I'm currently sitting in my house about a mile away and can drive over and take a snapshot of his house (his new one and even his old one across the street) if you would like. His son and their family are members of my church. --[[User:BenFranske|BenFranske]] 01:37, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
+*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170108033053/http://edinamn.gov/index.php?section=heritagelandmarks_countryclub to http://edinamn.gov/index.php?section=heritagelandmarks_countryclub
+*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100527155125/http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/27/2718188.html to http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/27/2718188.html
+*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151017153729/http://images.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/fecimg/?26920023374 to http://images.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/fecimg/?26920023374
+*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100408084739/http://www.dairyqueen.com/us-en/locations/ to http://www.dairyqueen.com/us-en/locations/
+When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
-:We need a source.  I don't think taking a picture of his house would help.  [[User:Pfalstad|Pfalstad]] 03:08, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
+{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}}
-::How about a picture of him standing infront of his house? :)--[[User:Gephart|Gephart]] 05:42, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
+Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 10:22, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
-:::That would do it.  No, he would have to be holding a sign saying "this is my house".  :)  Actually I found a source that he lives in Edina, or he did in 1997: [http://www.comm.umn.edu/twinsreport/ch5.htm] [http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1:62615438/Pohlad+is+urged+to+make+new+offer~R~(NEWS).html?refid=SEO] [[User:Pfalstad|Pfalstad]] 18:12, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
+== Presidential election table ==
-Thank goodness for political campaign contributions! I found site with Federal Elections Commission disclosure forms where he lists Edina as his home address for 2004, 2005 and 2006. See the  [http://query.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/com_ind/C00025254/1/P/ entire list] or [http://images.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/fecimg/?26920023374 most recent filing]. --[[User:BenFranske|BenFranske]] 01:30, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
+{{ping|Lakeperson|Sbmeirow}} The presidential election table adds [[WP:UNDUE|undue weight]].  The table features only one level of government, and avoids state and local leaders.  The table is out-of-scope and overly detailed, and is not suggested at [[WP:USCITIES]]. [[User:Magnolia677|Magnolia677]] ([[User talk:Magnolia677|talk]]) 11:23, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
-==Clean Up==
+: I agree with Magnolia677.  The table as presented is ugly, it is a data-dump with no accompanying text to put it in appropriate context (presumably because no secondary sources exist), and the idea that the politics of a town are best best discussed in terms of presidential election results are highly dubious at best.  --[[User:JayBeeEll|JBL]] ([[User_talk:JayBeeEll|talk]]) 13:47, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
+:I disagree. To parrot what I said on another discussion, I think displaying election results has encyclopedic value and can provide insight into the demographics of the town and how the party politics of an area have changed over time. While I have no problem with adding additional lists for state and local leaders, I think at the very least showing historic presidential election results as an umbrella for the political leanings of a settlement is valuable and worth keeping. I don't think we should disregard the data because it is "ugly", simply make the tables collapsible but available for those who want it. [[User:Mbdfar|Mbdfar]] ([[User talk:Mbdfar|talk]]) 18:44, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
+:: It can provide insight ''in the presence of proper sources that provide analysis and interpretation of the raw data''.  Find those sources and the objections go away.  Without those sources, this is an unencyclopedic data-dump. --[[User:JayBeeEll|JBL]] ([[User_talk:JayBeeEll|talk]]) 20:40, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
+:::{{reply to|JayBeeEll}} I guess I just don't understand why we need secondary interpretations of this data. We don't ask that of historical population numbers, do we? AFAIK just citing the census is considered fine. [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Cities/US_Guideline#Demographics|WP:USCITIES#Demographics]] doesn't state the need for secondary sources, just a description of the data. [[WP:INDISCRIMINATE]] does address "Excessive listings of unexplained statistics", but also just states the need for accompanying text (I wouldn't call the present listing "excessive" anyway). I guess the question that remains in my mind is; is it possible to include explanatory text providing context to this information using only primary sources? [[User:Mbdfar|Mbdfar]] ([[User talk:Mbdfar|talk]]) 21:48, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
+:::: This is raw data.  Insight (your word) is provided by ''analysis'' of raw data.  Analysis requires a secondary source, which is missing here.  Without analysis, this is exactly the kind of unexplained statistical data dump that [[WP:INDISCRIMINATE]] is talking about.  There are an infinite variety of raw data sources available about Edina (or any other place): dozens of kinds of weather data, dozens of kinds of demographic data, electoral data at all levels, economic data, ....  Each of these could potentially provide insight into Edina, ''with an appropriate analysis''.  Secondary sources are where you find the analysis that turns this from raw data into encyclopedic coverage; they also provide guidance as to which parts of which data are actually significant, as in [[WP:DUE]]. --[[User:JayBeeEll|JBL]] ([[User_talk:JayBeeEll|talk]]) 15:48, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
+:::::Again, I disagree. Insight can be achieved by just providing the data with a written explanation. I'm going to use the example of historic population figures again. Having a table with population data provides insight into the size and growth rate of a settlement. No secondary sources needed, just plain, easy to understand data. ''Why is this any different?'' An election results table is not complex, and with accompanying text (all that's required of [[WP:INDISCRIMINATE]]), I fail to see where in the guidelines it says that this information should be excluded. Reiterating my question from above, if an explanation using primary and reliable sources can be written without falling under [[WP:OR]], then why shouldn't it be included? "...dozens of kinds of weather data, dozens of kinds of demographic data, electoral data at all levels, economic data, ..." Ok, if it's properly sourced, formatted appropriately, and explained in the text, then sure! We already have templates for weather data, etc, why deprecate the use of them? These aren't opinions or concepts that can be skewed, so I don't understand why you invoked [[WP:DUE]] - would you mind elaborating on what part of that page is relevant here?  [[User:Mbdfar|Mbdfar]] ([[User talk:Mbdfar|talk]]) 16:22, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
+::::::{{ping|Magnolia677|JayBeeEll}}, I'm just requesting a response to my questions above. I'd love to come to a consensus on this. [[User:Mbdfar|Mbdfar]] ([[User talk:Mbdfar|talk]]) 15:26, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
+::::::: You asked <s>three</s><u>four</u> questions.  To your first question, my answers are: it is incredibly easy to find secondary sources about populated places with longstanding census data that discuss and analyze the data, so provide something encyclopedic to say about it.  To your <s>second</s><u>third</u> question, my answer is: see the answer to my first question.  These are data sets that get discussed ''all the time'' in all sorts of sources, so they do not suffer from the same problem.  With respect to your <s>third</s><u>fourth</u> question, here is a quotation from [[WP:DUE]]: {{tq|Neutrality requires that each article or other page in the mainspace fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in the published, reliable sources. ... Undue weight can be given in several ways, including but not limited to depth of detail, quantity of text, ....}}  The prominence of this information in published, reliable sources appears to be 0, and the coverage in the article should be proportional to that.  ("Someone has written at least once about a topic in a reliable secondary source" is an extremely low bar to jump over!) --[[User:JayBeeEll|JBL]] ([[User_talk:JayBeeEll|talk]]) 17:21, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
+::::::: I see on re-reading that I missed one, but my response to it is covered by my response to the other three. --[[User:JayBeeEll|JBL]] ([[User_talk:JayBeeEll|talk]]) 17:24, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
+:::::: Election results are as important, if not more, than demographics of a community. [[User:Lakeperson|Lakeperson]] ([[User talk:Lakeperson|talk]]) 16:21, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
+Election results, particularly for more than one election, provides valuable insight to a community, its values, and is certainly as important, probably even more, than racial demographics of a community, which is already included. Counties on Wikipedia have their election results shown and an entire county is incredibly vague on what that signifies for values. Secondary sources are literally in my posts directly from the Secretary of State Office. You can not get any more direct sourcing than that. The table is collapsible and if a person does not care to see it they do not have to. Recent political leanings are certainly more important than a historical event that occurred in a community 100 year ago. [[User:Lakeperson|Lakeperson]] ([[User talk:Lakeperson|talk]]) 18:52, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
-All that needs to be cleaned up is the history and naming of Edina.  I have copy edited the rest of the article.  I will get to these eventually, but i can do no more at this moment.  So anyone looking at the tag and wondering what they can do, you can work on those sections, because the rest of pretty much already done.  LETS MAKE THIS ARTICLE BETTER THAN THE [[St. Louis Park]] ARTICLE PEOPLE!!  Thankszoreos.--[[User:Gephart|Geppy]] 23:14, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
+Magnolia677  has yet again engaged in an edit war after him and I literally just got through with one on similar matter (See, New Fairfield, CT) about the election table and his removal of it there. (Finally reached an end agreement of being collapsible suggested by @Mbdfar . before the article was protected by an admin because of our edit war ) I have learned from my mistake to not engage in this and yet Magnolia677 has once again gone back and fourth deleting this. I feel before it is deleted he should need to start a talk beforehand. Right now with his most recent severe action the whole Politics section has been wiped. It certainly does add encyclopedic value. Hopefully this will be reverted & Magnolia677 will be talked to about his actions on the site.  [[User:Elvisisalive95|Elvisisalive95]] ([[User talk:Elvisisalive95|talk]]) 22:00, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
-:Removed image, map on Minnesota with dot representing Edina, MNMap-doton-Edina.png --[[User:Gephart|Geppy]] 00:19, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
+:{{reply to|Elvisisalive95}}, Magnolia677 is not your enemy. They just have a different vision for what a quality article looks like. If Wikipedia policy is on their side, their edits will prevail. That's what we are figuring out now. Please don't [[WP:HOUND]]. [[User:Mbdfar|Mbdfar]] ([[User talk:Mbdfar|talk]]) 22:11, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
+::Fair enough & understood.  [[User:Elvisisalive95|Elvisisalive95]] ([[User talk:Elvisisalive95|talk]]) 22:58, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
-::ALMOST DONE!! All i have left to do is the history section, rewrite the first paragraph and proof read.  Then the clean up tag can be removed.--[[User:Gephart|Geppy]] 08:48, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
-:::CLEAN-UP FINISHED.--[[User:Gephart|Geppy]] 02:23, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
-==Techpower in Edina?==
-Is Techpower a major employer in Edina? They may have moved but on their website the address is James Ave. in Bloomington. --[[User:BenFranske|BenFranske]] 01:52, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
-:I couldnt find anything that said they lived in Edina either (including their website).  It was part of an old list that was on prior to me cleaning up the article.  I say we go ahead and remove it if their website says Bloomington.--[[User:Gephart|Gephart]] 05:30, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
-Edina schools needs to be cleaned up, percentages are completely wrong.
-== Edinans(Cake Eaters)? ==
-What is someone that is from Edina called? Edinan? Edinite? Does anyone know? [[User:Deyyaz|Deyyaz]] <sup>[ [[User talk:Deyyaz|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Deyyaz|Contribs]] ]</sup> 03:28, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
-:An Edina Resident.--[[User:Gephart|Gephart]] 13:17, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
-:Thank you for the quick response.[[User:Deyyaz|Deyyaz]] <sup>[ [[User talk:Deyyaz|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Deyyaz|Contribs]] ]</sup> 02:11, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
-If you were looking for the colloquial terms, the Edina residents are called Edinaians, or, more pejoratively, Cake Eaters. [[User:Blingice|Blingice]] 18:33, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
-theyre called cake eaters
-theyre called Ediners
-they are called Ediners since Edina is not a rich suburb anymore (compared to the other suburbs in Minnesota)
-==Template for a U.S. City==
-For those are working on editing and expanding this article, please follow the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities#Template_for_a_U.S._City|Template for a U.S. City]]. As it is, this article does not conform with that format. Thanks!--[[User:Daveswagon|Daveswagon]] 09:37, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
-"These are only suggestions, things to give you focus and to get you going, and you shouldn't feel obligated in the least to follow them." So f*ck you Daveswagon!!!
-==Triva Section==
-The majority of the Trivia Section appears to be about famous/notable Edina residents.  As trivia sections are discouraged, perhaps the section should be renamed and trimmed accordingly?  (e.g. The Southdale reference is already redundant, as it is covered above in the shopping section.) [[User:Elcobbola|Elcobbola]] 17:57, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
-:I've created the "Notable Edinians" section and altered the trivia section accordingly. [[User:Elcobbola|Elcobbola]] 16:50, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
-:I just wanted to drop a note about my removal of two trivia items.  I want to assert and assure that the removal was not politically motivated (both mentioned George W. Bush).  There was a mention of President Bush visiting a private residence as a fundraiser and a mention of a book being given to him as a present from Edina.  The references are not notable and only indirectly pertain to the City of Edina.  If they must be mentioned, the “visit reference” would fit better on the Republican Party or George W. Bush pages and the “Lest We Forget” reference” on a “Lest We Forget” page (the current lack of such a page further demonstrates the lack of notability for this reference). [[User:Elcobbola|Elcobbola]] 20:38, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
-==History Section==
-I made some substantial changes to the History section.  I removed the first two paragraphs, as they did not pertain to the history of Edina but, rather, Minnesota/Hennepin/Minneapolis.  I’ve replaced them with a link to the main article on Minneapolis history,  The remainder of the changes were primarily to remove redundancy and better organize the section. [[User:Elcobbola|Elcobbola]] 15:33, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
-==Fair use rationale for Image:Edina seal.gif==
-[[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|70px|left]]
-'''[[:Image:Edina seal.gif]]''' is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under [[Wikipedia:Fair use|fair use]] but there is no [[Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline|explanation or rationale]] as to why its use in '''this''' Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the [[Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/Fair use|boilerplate fair use template]], you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with [[WP:FU|fair use]].
-Please go to [[:Image:Edina seal.gif|the image description page]] and edit it to include a [[Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline |fair use rationale]]. Using one of the templates at [[Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline]] is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
-If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Images.2FMedia|criteria for speedy deletion]]. If you have any questions please ask them at the [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions|Media copyright questions page]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Missing rationale2 -->
-[[User:BetacommandBot|BetacommandBot]] ([[User talk:BetacommandBot|talk]]) 20:33, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
-==Places of Worship==
-Apparently there are only Christians in Edina. Someone care to add some non-christian places of worship to the new section?
-[[User:Kirkmona|Kirkmona]] ([[User talk:Kirkmona|talk]]) 03:29, 7 January 2009 (UTC)