Jump to content

Talk:New York City: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 164: Line 164:


The intro paragraph makes a statement 'Though the city's actual name is just New York' which is '''false'''. The 'actual' (read: official) name is 'The City of New York.' Someone make the change please.[[Special:Contributions/65.215.94.13|65.215.94.13]] ([[User talk:65.215.94.13|talk]]) 18:50, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
The intro paragraph makes a statement 'Though the city's actual name is just New York' which is '''false'''. The 'actual' (read: official) name is 'The City of New York.' Someone make the change please.[[Special:Contributions/65.215.94.13|65.215.94.13]] ([[User talk:65.215.94.13|talk]]) 18:50, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
:Nevermind, made the change- forgot to log in so couldn't edit![[User:Tatumstevens2|Tatumstevens2]] ([[User talk:Tatumstevens2|talk]]) 18:53, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:53, 31 December 2009

Template:VA

Featured articleNew York City is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 6, 2007.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 17, 2004Featured article candidateNot promoted
December 20, 2005Good article nomineeListed
February 17, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
April 4, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
July 17, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
September 18, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
November 28, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
January 31, 2007Featured article candidateNot promoted
June 10, 2007Featured article candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article

 It has been decided that New York City should remain at that name and not at New York, New York. For the discussion that led to this decision see Archive 2 and the additional comments in a section of Archive 5.  A proposal to rename the New York City article to New York failed to reach a consensus and was closed on August 7, 2008. The discussion can be found at Talk:New York/Archive 3.

Sister Cities' importance

Why Sister Cities have the same level of importance that history or geography.? Alakasam (talk) 12:56, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Probably because they don't seem to fit well into any other section. Sister Cities is a common standard feature in Wikipedia's city articles. —— Shakescene (talk) 16:31, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It may be misleading to say that all of them are the largest cities in their respective country except for Beijing because that might not include the entire metropolitan area. For example, the Tel Aviv metro area is 3 times the size of the Jerusalem metro area. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.108.211.120 (talk) 05:19, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Very good point. However, the sister city relationship is usually between New York City and an equivalent municipality or authority abroad, rather than between the New York Metropolitan Area and a demographic equivalent. In general, the equivalent body is the central city, rather than a surrounding region that often bears the same name (which is why I deleted that column from this table, e.g. Madrid and Comunidad de Madrid). The exception seems to be London, where the NYC page on sister cities seems to refer equally to the historic square-mile City of London, headed by the ceremonial Lord Mayor of London, and to the Greater London Authority, whose mayors have been Ken Livingstone and Boris Johnson. I'll see if there's a concise way of making the population comparison clearer. —— Shakescene (talk) 20:17, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, on sister cities. Istanbul is not the capital of Turkey, even though it is in many senses its cultural and financial center.205.248.102.83 (talk) 00:02, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great catch!! (which I've just fixed). Thanks. How did I miss that when I first wrote that sentence? —— Shakescene (talk) 19:26, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think you did miss it. Someone must have added it later. Istanbul and Santiago are not listed at the ref, so I removed them. Station1 (talk) 02:46, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
¶ It's hard to track down; I think it's one of those teenage-status (or Facebook) type things where some cities seem more eager to twin themselves to New York City than New York (nose held haughtily aloft) is to twin herself with them. The Istanbul#Sister cities section gives two Turkish links that list no fewer than 49 cities twinned to the Queen of the Bosphorus (which considering that for over a millennium, Byzantium and Constantinople, or the Second Rome, probably had a better claim than any other city to be world's de facto capital, isn't as unfair as it might look). Santiago de los Caballeros#Sister cities gives only four (Havana, New York, San Juan and Santiago de Compostela), but without any sources at all.
¶ Unfortunately, Sister Cities International, whose recognition is used as New York City#Sister cities' authority for enumerating those ten cities, is overhauling its web site, making it very hard to verify at the moment. If someone feels inclined to check the 83 press releases and announcements that an internal search of the site returns for "New York" (EXACT PHRASE), more power to him or her.
¶ Which leaves New York City's own Sister Cities page, which I haven't consulted in a while. NYC.gov is hardly perfect and is often out of date, so while it's a good source for positive citation of the cities it does list (e.g. City of London vs Greater London), I wouldn't rely on it 100% as a negative authority that ipso facto proves the non-sisterhood of a city not mentioned at the site today. Any ideas? —— Shakescene (talk) 04:46, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Settled to Founded

This is an editing request. Can you change the date name in the table from sttled to founded? I don't know how. HELP!! Michaeljacksonfreak22 (talk) 14:03, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Size of Lower Manhattan

Sorry, but I have read some other sources stating that Lower Manhattan dropped to 4th place in amount of office space after 9/11 (behind downtown Washington) and will only regain the 3rd place title after 1 WTC (Freedom Tower) is constructed. So shall we alter that one sentence for now?Mathpianist93 (talk) 00:45, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poorest city

This article states that New York City is the poorest city in America. http://www.city-journal.org/2009/eon0806em.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.202.75.25 (talk) 21:57, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request

{{editsemiprotected}} Why is the Jewish population of NYC compared to that of Tel Aviv (in the "Demographics" section of the page)? Jerusalem is in fact the most populous city is Israel, as well as the city with the largest number of Jews in Israel, and NYC has a geater Jewish population than Jerusalem so why is this camparison not made?

This comparison is not made because there is no source for this information. If you can provide a source, I'd be willing to make the adjustment. Intelligentsium 02:32, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bloomberg's third term

This article does not reflect the fact that Bloomberg ran for and won a third term as NYC mayor. Suggested changes:

In the fall of 2008, Bloomberg successfully campaigned for an amendment to New York City's term limits law, in order to allow him to run for a third term in 2009. Bloomberg was the Republican and Independence Party's nominee and won the election on November 3, 2009.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Jay Rosen (talkcontribs) 04:43, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've updated the election information, although updating and simplifying the footnote will have to wait for the Board of Elections to post their 2009 general election numbers to their web site (http://www.nycvote.gov ). —— Shakescene (talk) 10:52, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

I think the population of the city for 2000 should be put in the infobox (not just a 2008 estimate). (I cannot edit the box correctly myself.) The 2000 population should be put in the first paragraph of the article, replacing the 2007 estimate. hello (talk) 09:45, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's a tricky point, which has crossed my mind (and I think others'). What makes it tricky is that when populations are changing rapidly (as has often happened to New York and her individual boroughs), a different distortion is introduced by sticking to the 2000 numbers. While the 2000 census is used for apportioning legislative districts and Presidential Electors, the later estimates are often used for international comparisons, economic analysis, social statistics and distributing government revenues (both state and Federal). This will be moot by the end of next year, when the first returns from the April 2010 census will be known. Both the 2000 numbers and the 2008 estimates are already included in the Historical Population table. —— Shakescene (talk) 10:27, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Estimated population in lede

I would appreciate input from others on whether using an unrounded figure (8,363,710) for the population based on a 2008 estimate (some such estimates are actually revised after the fact) or a rounded, more memorable figure (exceeds 8.3 million) is more appropriate for the lede of the article. The specific unrounded figure still appears in the infobox. A relatively new editor is changed rounded figures to figures suggesting a false degree of precision in several city articles (without any edit summaries) --JimWae (talk) 21:39, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A rounded figure in the lead flows better, in my opinion. --BaronLarf 21:50, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
NOTE: A discussion related to this issue has been started at WT:USCITY#Population estimates. --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 06:49, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
All due respect JimWae and BaronLarf I have posted the latest official estimate population in the opening paragragh in the article you are talking about. I posted my reasons in the discussion page that Barek alluded to. New York City also had the highest population gain (53,498) than any other city and I am currently gathering information to try to include this accomplishment in this same paragraph as well. I believe the actual numbers will lead into this statement. I will post here what I intend to post in the NYC site tomorrow (12/31) and it will stay here 24 hours before I post it. If anyone is opposed to this you can absolutely post your reasons here or in the WT:USCITY#Population estimates and I will discuss them before I post. Thank you Mattscards (talk) 03:38, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:BRD and WP:lede. You have not made your case. --JimWae (talk) 05:00, 31 December 2009 (UTC)--JimWae (talk) 05:00, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New York City versus City of New York

The intro paragraph makes a statement 'Though the city's actual name is just New York' which is false. The 'actual' (read: official) name is 'The City of New York.' Someone make the change please.65.215.94.13 (talk) 18:50, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, made the change- forgot to log in so couldn't edit!Tatumstevens2 (talk) 18:53, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]