Talk:The Bronx

Bronx's Economy

This article doesn't talks about the economy in the Bronx. Someone go do the economy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.61.1.105 (talk) 05:22, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

August 16, 2009, copy-edits of the introduction

Let me give some brief explanations of the individual points in a batch reversion I made to a knowledgeable IP editor's batch copy-editing of the lede (introductory paragraph), so that they can be considered individually:

1. Longish tag (which I'll restore): I and most of the editors here agree, but see several previous discussions where we tried to figure out (inconclusively) how and where to cut. Neighborhoods is a particularly thorny section.
2. Five Boroughs was capitalized because the Five Boroughs is a specific informal title (sobriquet) like the Seven Seas or the Fifty States.
3. When writing this lead, I thought that saying that Bronx County was the newest of New York state's 62 counties was sufficient to indicate that New York City was in New York state.
4. Similarly, if it's the northernmost of the City's five boroughs, and it's northeast of Manhattan, it seemed unnecessary to say that Manhattan's a borough. In fact, since Manhattan is an island and a place anyway, its governmental status isn't a necessary part of the very first paragraph (it's explained thoroughly enough later in the article).
5. Although this is a weaker argument, Bronx County being in New York state implies that Westchester County (in the absence of another state's name) is also in New York state; but I'm open to argument on this (as on any other point).
6. I don't think that mainland and island need wikilinks. I link pretty liberally myself, but a sea of blue can be a huge distraction to the unwikified ordinary reader.
7. Less strongly, I believe the same applies to North America. I did wikilink North America once when working on the lead for New York City (which is in many ways almost a state in itself) but at this level it's probably unnecessary.
8. While I'm no believer in the "Wikilink only once per article" philosophy, I think that the first wikilink to each borough is close enough in this paragraph to its second and subsequent appearances that extra wikilinks aren't needed. The reader who wants to find a particular borough's wikilink can find and reach it quickly enough.
9. There was a long earlier discussion about whether to capitalize the article in The Bronx when it appears mid-sentence (as here). The consensus was (partly in conformity with practices for analogous places like The Hague) that "the Bronx" should as a general rule be the style inside a sentence (as opposed to, say, "an article in The New York Times"). No consensus is an iron-clad rule, but the issue should be revived separately so that the article as a whole follows the same style.
10. Wikilinking Alaska and Wyoming in the footnote for the benefit of those who might want to look them up is fine, but the other wikilinks seem unnecessary.

I'm certainly open to argument on any of these points, but I had to break them down first. —— Shakescene (talk) 07:00, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Shakes, I don'[t think your argument re capitalizing "Five Boroughs" is persuasive, as it is only an informal designation. OTOH, I do see your point. Bellagio99 (talk) 20:06, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Possible Changes by MisterPitt

A relatively new user MisterPitt has proposed many changes to the structure and substance of this article -- without discussing them on this Talk Page. Some have prima facie merit; others are more debatable (the wholesale deletions). I've rolled back, so that those interested in this article could have some prior discussion. YMMV Bellagio99 (talk) 14:18, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Streamlining article content

This main article about "The Bronx" would best serve as a concise introduction for the borough, with the appropriate links to the many sub-articles which cover the borough in detail. In my attempts to streamline the article I removed content covered in the boroughs sub-articles (history, demographics, education etc).--MisterPitt (talk) 14:35, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

As one of the three editors (including Bellagio99 and Jd2718) who's done the most work on this page over the last year or so, I don't disagree with your aim, and I don't want to discourage fresh energy and thought, but I think, to keep things stable, this needs to be done slowly. As you can see from earlier discussions, this question has certainly been considered seriously in the past, but it's not easy to plan a good way to proceed.

There are sub-articles for some Bronx topics, but in some cases it's arguable if they're as good as the shorter, corresponding section here. And in some cases, e.g. history (cf. History of Brooklyn), it might be best to create the sub-page first. In the case of history, that requires someone to finish up what is at present a mediocre section with several good parts. In cases such as Labor and economics, or Health and medicine, not even a section has been created, let alone a page. Neighborhoods is a particularly tough nut to crack, but one that definitely needs some imaginative compression that makes it more accessible to non-New Yorkers. The two cultural sections could stand by themselves as sub-articles or a single merged article, but someone needs to write good summaries. On the other hand Bronx#Parks and open space, most of which I wrote, looks fine in its present place, though a bit over-long, but would look a bit stubby standing alone.

None of this is meant to discourage anyone, but just to explain why (although there has been much significant rationalization) more hasn't been done so far. —— Shakescene (talk) 20:46, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Infobox

I think the population of the county 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 2008 estimate. hello (talk) 09:35, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm waiting for the first results of the (April 1) 2010 Census to come in, but in the meantime, I've put in the June 2010 estimates for July 1, 2009. There are certainly valid arguments to be made both ways in any given article item about whether to use 2000 Census data or later intercensal (post-Census) estimates, but since some preliminary 2010 Census results should be arriving soon, the point seems a little moot. (And I still need to update the estimates at some of the other boroughs, as well as at New York City, where a talk page contributor wanted the 2008 estimates to go forward to July 1, 2009, rather than back to April 1, 2000.) If you want to comment on (or, more problematically, edit) the "Five Boroughs at a Glance" box, see Template talk:NYC boroughs. —— Shakescene (talk) 17:49, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Partner City

The german wikipedia says that the bronx is a partner city of the viennese bezirk "Leopoldstadt". I guess this should be mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.115.137.37 (talk) 03:49, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Addition by User: Rjensen WP:OR ? WP:COPYVIO ?

I'm concerned about the long new addition to the article, for two reasons. One, it is unsourced. Two, it is so well written that I wonder if it came from an already-published source. User: Rjensen please reassure. Bellagio99 (talk) 01:57, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

I added some cites--the info comes from two articles by Olmsted and also the Jackson '"Encyclopedia. "so well written" -- thanks, :) --I've written quite a bit of history for Wikipedia. I must say that there seems to be less scholarship on the Bronx than any place in the U.S. of one fourth its population. Rjensen (talk) 02:28, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Lloyd Ultan, the Bronx Borough Historian (who, I think, teaches at Fairleigh Dickinson University in New Jersey) has written a five-volume History of the Bronx, and a dozen other works (which are hard for me to consult, let alone read, since I live in Rhode Island; however, I own the Encyclopedia of NYC, whose Bronx article Prof. Ultan co-authored, making him one of Rjensen's indirect sources as well as one of my own). I've often toyed idly with the idea of asking Prof. Ultan to suggest that some of his Bronx History students might want to fill in and clean up our history section.

A couple of years ago, I cleaned up and rearranged the history section about as best as it could be fixed given its very spotty elements. I'm not sure how the additional overlapping paragraphs of Rjensen (whose work I already know from hanging out on the fringes of War of 1812) can best fit in with the rest of the history. It's not really an overview or summary because it doesn't begin until well into (in fact the end of) the 19th century, so logically it should come after The Bronx#Origins and name of The Bronx but before The Bronx#Before 1914. But then, while much better-written than that section and The Bronx#Since 1914, it's rather duplicative.

To look at it from the other end, as an Overview it doesn't do anything to fill in the huge gap in the previously-written history sections (aside from their other flaws, such as OR), which is a giant empty leap from the end of the 17th century to the initial moves towards consolidation in the middle 19th century.

This is just to outline what I consider to be problems to be worked out, not an attack on a welcome effort to move this article forward.

P.S. Since a renaming wiped out its original creation and edit history, what is the inspiration, genesis and purpose of the new article on History of the Bronx? —— Shakescene (talk) 04:45, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Shakescene is right that Ultan's popular history books should be mentioned, so I added them. His article in Jackson Encyclopedia is much more helpful for this article. As for gaps in the history, people wil lstart filling them in.Rjensen (talk) 05:02, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Length

Too long? the solution is to let the History of the Bronx article cober the small details--which it does now, so there is no need to duplicatet hat here. This article needs to focus on the bigger historical themes. Rjensen (talk) 07:46, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

(Edit conflict): I just saw an enhanced warning in the edit box that going over 120 kB would make this already-overlong article become hard to load even for fast connections, which might make it nearly-impossible for many small memories, slow processors or dial-up narrowband connections. There are several earlier (but generally inconclusive) discussions above about where we could cut or spin off most effectively (e.g. Politics, Education, Transportation and, especially, Neighborhoods). And there are still topics yet to be covered, such as Business, Labor and Health. Since the new history overview is mainly a better-written repeat of either the Lead or the following sections, it seemed hard to keep while the whole article was suffering overload, so I reluctantly deleted it. However, several sentences could supplement or replace other previously-existing language. And there's plenty of room at History of the Bronx. —— Shakescene (talk) 07:55, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

we've solved the length problem, and the article is now shorter than it's been in years. The solution is to use that auxiliary article where people who want the small historical details can find them. Rjensen (talk) 08:02, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Name of Bronx, the Bronx and The Bronx

Discussions of the/The Bronx's name and The use and capitalization of The definite article (as of October 2010) have been moved to Talk:The Bronx/Name, where they are consolidated with related discussions going back to 2005 (or 2003). —— Shakescene (talk) 18:36, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

An amusing aside

I was doing a little research to see if I could determine how many days the article has spent under each of the two titles "Bronx" and "The Bronx", but was thwarted because the move logs don't seem to go back far enough to accurately determine which title was in use before 2007. I did, however, come across the very first state of the article, which I thought was amusing for its content, and educational in showing just how far this project has come in 9 years. Take a look for a chuckle, and an appreciation for what we've all managed to create (and I mean that generally, not just in regard to this article). Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:11, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

OMG !!! Bellagio99 (talk) 00:42, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

That is Amazing, Ken! And funny. I'd hate to see what the old South Bronx article was like... but, I almost can't help but look. futurebird (talk) 05:39, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

I got too busy with Brooklyn when the discussion was going on about whether to vote or not, and how, and now I'm too lazy to tease meaning out of the massive material above. Is some kind of poll in progress? If so, I vote "The Bronx". Jim.henderson (talk) 18:56, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Jim, just add your name here Beyond My Ken (talk) 19:13, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Demographic edits

1. User:The Universe Is Cool put up what s/he calls new American Community Survey demographic data. I assume it is accurate, but there is no reliable, verified reference. I've reverted until then, as it is hard for the general reader to check statistical info.

2. I also related the same user's deletion of much of the other demographic matter because I believe it could usefully stay in the article with some rewriting. If not, then it should be discussed on this page. Bellagio99 (talk) 01:19, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

As to 1, the American Community Survey may sound vague, but it's fundamentally extremely sound. It's the main workhorse survey carried out by the U.S. Census Bureau between the decennial censuses, involving a quarter of a million households every month, and produces many of the data we see that don't derive from the 1990 and 2000 Censuses (whose main purpose, after all, was, like the 2010 Census, to meet Constitutional requirements for reapportioning Congress and the Electoral College every ten years). I didn't work on the 2010 Census, but I think the Long Form of earlier censuses has been deprecated in favor of using ACS data. That said, of course, one needs to indicate at least the general report, date or location of the ACS data supporting a particular statement, since the sea of ACS data is so huge and varied. —— Shakescene (talk) 06:00, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Shakes & Universe, We agree. Bellagio99 (talk) 12:42, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Can I put the 2009 information in the article while keeping the 2005-2007 info? The Universe Is Cool (talk) 19:38, 11 October 2010 (UTC)The Universe Is Cool

I think that would be a good idea, but please remember you gotta give a reference for the ACS, as per discussion. Thx. Bellagio99 (talk) 19:45, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

What do you mean give a reference? I gave two references to the website with all the statements I made in Demographics of the Bronx. Am I missing something here? I'll put in the 2009 data, give the sources for that data, and leave the 2005-2007 data, too. I don't know what I'm doing wrong here, but I guess you can help me out with it if you want. Thanks. The Universe Is Cool (talk) 20:20, 11 October 2010 (UTC)The Universe Is Cool

Thanks for supplying the references. If I missed them before, I apologize. Bellagio99 (talk) 21:25, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. No hard feelings.

The Universe Is Cool (talk) 22:02, 11 October 2010 (UTC)The Universe Is Cool

Moving recent additions to East Bronx

Some well-meaning editor recently added three sections to the Bronx#East Bronx sub-section of Neighborhoods, referring to

• the Bartow-Pell Mansion in Pelham Bay Park
• the Bronx Military Museum housed in two cases of the John Dormer Funeral Home lobby (which I've moved to Morris Park)
• and a Westchester Bridge battle monument described here: http://ferrypointbronx.org/index.html.

I removed all three of these items from the over-long Neighborhood section (in an over-long article) which should serve as a summary and guide to the much more detailed articles about individual places and neighborhoods. Since the first is a straight copy-and-paste from the Bartow-Pell Mansion article, briefly mentioned and linked in the Pelham Bay Park article, I didn't restore it. (However, I had briefly alluded to it in my paragraph about Van Cortlandt and Pelham Bay Parks in the Parks & Open Space section, before another editor trimmed it; I may add a word or two back in.)

The second item is more of a poignant human-interest story than a significant landmark, but it doesn't really hurt anything in the rather-lean Morris Park article. However, that whole article might well benefit from a little editing and strengthening of the neighborhood's more-notable features, preferably by someone who knows the Bronx better than I do. Does the photo of Public School 83 characterize the neighborhood better to the world in general than one of, say, the old Morris Park Racecourse or Albert Einstein College of Medicine? The 24 Hour Store or P.S. 108 could be very notable, for all I know, or relatively insignificant (apologies for any offense to the proud graduates, teachers and parents of PS 83 and PS 108).

As for the third, I'm not sure what to do. Does anyone know more about the apparently-pivotal battle of Westchester Bridge than is told by the monument and the blog article in the reference (itself acknowledging a local secondary source who started with one of Lloyd Ultan's histories)? And where's the best place to put it once it's more solid? (I'd guess in History of the Bronx.) —— Shakescene (talk) 18:58, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Cleaning up left-over links to "Bronx"

Now that we've moved this back to The Bronx, there are still over 500 (but fewer than 1,000) links to Bronx (according to "What links here" at Bronx). How many of these need checking and fixing to avoid broken links? Is there some automated or semi-automated way of doing this? —— Shakescene (talk) 22:11, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

There are no double redirects, so nothing needs fixing. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 00:52, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Tidying up name discussions

I was planning to move all the Bronx name discussions over to Talk:The Bronx/Name at some reasonable point after the most recent Request for Comments had closed. (I've already collapsed the box on this page that includes previous years' discussions.) When would be a good time to do so and open up some space and kilobytes on this talk page? —— Shakescene (talk) 17:48, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Soon, I hope. We certainly have discussed enough. Bellagio99 (talk) 00:23, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Just did the dirty work, instead of going out early on a nice, sunny but cold afternoon in Providence before Game 3 of the World Series (not played in Bronx) and the last local televised campaign debates. The consolidated archive of discussions about the borough and county's name now takes up about 120 kilobytes, or slightly more than the article about the place itself, its people and its culture (an article that's always pressing its own length limits for smaller memories and slower connections).—— Shakescene (talk) 18:36, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Marble Hill in map

The map illustrating this article shows Marble Hill, Manhattan as part of the Bronx. Shouldn't this be fixed? ScottyBerg (talk) 21:45, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Sure, fix it if you can in such a small space. Bellagio99 (talk) 23:22, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

I haven't the foggiest idea how to do that. I'll ask the map creator. But meanwhile, since it's not accurate I think that it has to go. ScottyBerg (talk) 16:00, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

I suggest you leave the map in unless you can replace with a better one. The article needs a map, and it is hard to be perfect on such a small scale. Please see if the Marble Hill exception is documented in the text of the article. If so, great. If not, please add. Bellagio99 (talk) 00:52, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

I think that an inaccurate map is worse than no map at all. The map is of such a size that the error is nontrivial. A contradiction with the text merely magnifies the error. ScottyBerg (talk) 15:54, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

I have added a note regarding the error in the image's caption. That should do until we can get the map corrected. I believe the map should remain in place until we get the corrected version, especially since the best and easiest way to fix it is to upload a new version to the same image file - that way the image will be corrected in all the language versions it's being used in. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 18:37, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I just noticed the note in the Manhattan article. I hadn't noticed that, or that we're dealing with two erroneous maps, not one. I've left a note on the Commons page of the map creator, but I don't know how active that user is. ScottyBerg (talk) 19:14, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

I've reverted to older, more accurate maps in both articles until the newer maps can be corrected. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 19:28, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that would be optimal, as the new map, while showing the borders of Marble Hill, continues to show it in the same color as the rest of the Bronx, which may confuse some readers. ScottyBerg (talk) 19:44, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Actually the neighborhood is colored grey with a yellow crosshatch in the image, perhaps as a compromise to an old editing dispute? —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 19:53, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

There are light gray lines interspersed, but these are only visible if you download the file and magnify it. Otherwise it appears the same color as the rest of the map. ScottyBerg (talk) 20:07, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Just for your information (but not to argue against what's been done), one of my long-range but long-unfinished projects is to retint those maps to match the master color scheme at Template:NYC boroughs and New York City mayoral elections, a palette which isn't perfect but was devised to avoid confusion with the political party colors in the latter article's tables. When and if I ever get around to recoloring those maps, I'll try to indicate (if not precisely map) the mainland part of New York County/Manhattan borough. Also, if you look at the 1896 New York Times map which I colored in partially at The Bronx#Location and physical features, I used pink for Marble Hill to distinguish it from the Bronx, so someone who reads more deeply into this rather-long article shouldn't be completely misled by the smaller map in the info box. —— Shakescene (talk) 10:06, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Capitalization

Although the borough may be called "the Bronx," that does not mean that the word "the" must be capitalized when not at the beginning of a sentence. For instance, it should be "The population of the Bronx..." and not "The population of The Bronx..." 98.209.116.7 (talk) 06:23, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

In the couple of years that I've worked on this article, I've always understood that to be the consensus: when "the Bronx" doesn't begin a sentence, isn't part of a title that capitalizes "The" (e.g., The Bronx News), and isn't a direct quotation from a source that capitalizes "The" in mid-sentence, then leave "the" in lower case. (Although I generally agree with the consensus, I've sometimes leaned in the opposite direction and I don't think the arguments on the other side have no merit or are not made in good faith by intelligent people who are just as well-informed as I am, if not more so.) This is one of several topics that come up periodically, as can be seen in a subpage of this Talk Page devoted specifically to such questions: Talk:The Bronx/Name. Unless this consensus has suddenly changed, my advice would be that you should feel free to change "The Bronx" to "the Bronx" where one of the exceptions doesn't apply. The worst that could happen is that another editor might re-capitalize "The" and the disagreement bounces back here where it belongs; no one will doubt that your edits were in good faith. —— Shakescene (talk) 06:50, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

I don't understand why—if that is the consensus on usage—WP:THE does not apply. The article should be at Bronx because (1) the meaning does not change whether you have "The Bronx" vs. "Bronx", and (2) we don't capitalize the "The" in running prose. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 21:26, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

That's just precisely it: the consensus is that WP:THE doesn't apply, because "the" (capitalized or not) is always used with the Bronx, unless "Bronx" is being used as an adjective (which is typical; articles are often left off in adjectival usage). There are some other exceptions (blame the USPS), but the name of the borough includes the article. And therefore so does the name of the article. Did you actually read the most recent archived discussions on this? oknazevad (talk) 00:22, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

File:Ny-bronx.gif Nominated for Deletion

	An image used in this article, File:Ny-bronx.gif, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Deletion requests June 2011 What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 10:32, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

New Map

The new Bronx Race Map is out and it shows many changes.

http://geographer-at-large.blogspot.com/2011/03/new-census.html

I will not upload the new map in place of the 10 year old 2000 Map.

Someone else can do that. I haven't got the time.

Supercool Dude (talk) 21:47, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Origin of Jonas Brunk (Bronck)

The article states that Jonas was danish when he was in fact swedish. He was born in Komstad, Smaland, Sweden

His wife was from Holland and not from Denmark as one of the source say.

Read all the other wikipedia sites about this (other langauges) and you will find that all of them points out that he is Swedish and not Danish — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.226.244.114 (talk) 10:21, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Note: It would be very helpful if secondary sources were provided to support the statement: “He was born in Komstad, Smaland, Sweden”. Can anyone identify the location of relevant materials, author’s credentials, and publication dates? Eritasactium (talk) 00:42, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

SVT (Swedish Television) made a program about the Swede Jonas Brunk, who worked on Dutch ships, and became the captain of a ship, and married a Dutch woman. Sometime during this process he changed his name to Bronck, probably to fit better in the Dutch society (language). He settled in New Amsterdam. He bought a land area north-east of New Amsterdam (Manhattan) from the local Indians and it became known as Bronck's, or Bronck's land. The spelling was later changed to Bronx. Britain took over (bought?) New Amsterdam from Holland and it was renamed to New York. The program was made after historians had investigated the issue and the program showed evidence for the fact that Jonas Brunk was a Swede to begin with.

SVT started the first two TV channels in Sweden with government support, and its channels TV1 and TV2 are generally more serious and produce more documentaries than all the commercial channels which started a lot later. TV1 and TV2 are public service TV channels, in contrast to the commercial channels, TV3 TV4 TV5 etc.. which are based on for-profit management. Roger491127 (talk) 00:43, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Bronck was Danish

In regard to a reference associated with our edit of 17:53, 16 November 2011, the following describes credentials of A.J.F. van Laer, and also provides Wikipedia descriptions of the American Historical Association and the “American Historical Review”, the journal that published van Laer’s cited statement “…Jonas Bronck was a Dane…”

Arnold Johan Ferdinand (A.J.F.) van Laer was a librarian and archivist with the New York State Library (1899-1915) and the Division of History and Archives (1915-1939), best known for his translations of New York’s colonial Dutch records. Published works include four volumes of New Netherland records, two of Beverwyck, six of Albany County, four relating to Rensselaerswyck, and one of Lutheran records in Holland relative to the Colony of New York. He also wrote numerous articles for journals, principally the New York State Historical Association Quarterly, the Dutch Settlers Society of Albany Yearbook, and the New York Genealogical and Biographical Society Record. His translations are considered superior to those of any of his predecessors or contemporaries, a result of his fluency in both Dutch and English, his research into colonial history and language, his understanding of Dutch customs and traditions, and his particular interest in the individual settlers. Frequently overlooked are his contribution to the developing professions of manuscript curator and archivist and his efforts to encourage the preservation of historical records.

A.J.F. van Laer was born in Utrecht and settled in the United States in 1897, living in Albany from 1897 until his death in 1955. He received the degrees of mechanical engineer at the University of Delft and bachelor of library science at the New York State Library School. He and his wife had three sons. Biographical information can be found in a memorial address by Charles K. Winne, Jr., published in the Yearbook of the Dutch Settlers Society of Albany for 1954-1956, and reprinted in volume one of New York Historical Manuscripts: Dutch (Baltimore, 1974).

Scope and Content (of the New York State Library’s van Laer archives): These papers contain correspondence, research notes, and other administrative materials relating to Van Laer's duties as librarian and archivist with the New York State Library (1899-1915) and the Division of History and Archives (1915-1939). The correspondence concerns his published translations of documents related to the Dutch colonial period in New York State. For example, his correspondence with Howard Townsend concerns translation of Dutch documents in the Van Rensselaer Manor Papers. In addition, his correspondence also relates to the history and genealogy of families of Dutch origin and New York Colonial history in general. (Source – the New York State Library)

The American Historical Review (AHR) is the official publication of the American Historical Association (AHA). The AHA was founded in 1884 and chartered by Congress in 1889 to serve the interests of the entire discipline of history. Aligning with the AHA’s mission, the AHR has been the journal of record for the historical profession in the United States since 1895—the only journal that brings together scholarship from every major field of historical study. The AHR is unparalleled in its efforts to choose articles that are new in content and interpretation and that make a contribution to historical knowledge. The journal also publishes approximately one thousand book reviews per year, surveying and reporting the most important contemporary historical scholarship in the discipline.

The American Historical Association (AHA) is the oldest and largest society of historians and professors of history in the United States. Founded in 1884, the association promotes historical studies, the teaching of history, and the preservation of and access to historical materials. It publishes The American Historical Review five times a year, with scholarly articles and book reviews. The AHA is the major organization for historians working in the United States, while the Organization of American Historians is the major organization for historians who study and teach about the United States. Eritasactium (talk) 03:55, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

under 'contents'

i couldn't find "crime"; there seems to be no section on the city's crime situation. did i miss it? 67.171.186.151 (talk) 03:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

There are several important topics (such as the Bronx's economy, business, labor and health care) which haven't yet been covered. If you can find some good sources about crime, policing and crime prevention, please feel free to start a new section. (So long as your sources, such as newspaper reports, magazine articles, official documents or books, are public and reliable, and your information is presented in a neutral way, you don't need to be a Bronx resident or an expert; I'm neither. And don't worry too much about matching Wikipedia's style, grammar or spelling; other readers can fix any problems if the underlying matter is sound.) Since the New York Police Department is unified over the five boroughs, some of the information may be found in New York City and other articles about the city as a whole. Also see History of the Bronx and Government and politics of the Bronx. —— Shakescene (talk) 02:20, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

School mission creep

For New York City, any borough, and almost any place article in Wikipedia, there's the perennial problem of the slow accretion of schools in the Education section until it becomes an unreadable list of names that mean absolutely nothing to any outsider (for whose benefit, presumably, the article has largely been written). This is natural, since every parent, student, teacher and graduate should feel that his or her school is very important, and at least as important as any other school. The most striking example I found was Staten Island#Education, which at one point reported, "Public middle schools include I.S. 2, I.S. 7, I.S. 24, I.S. 27, I.S. 34, I.S. 49, I.S. 51, I.S. 61, I.S. 72, and I.S. 75." (diff) Every one of those schools meant something very important to someone, who then proceeded to add it to the list, although no one outside New York could tell one from the other. (See Talk:Staten Island#AC?)

We've hit that point (once yet again) in The Bronx#High schools, whose paragraph on non-parochial high schools now reads

Many public high schools are located in the borough including the élite Bronx High School of Science, DeWitt Clinton High School, High School for Violin and Dance, Bronx Leadership Academy 2, Bronx International High School, the School for Excellence, the Morris Academy for Collaborative Study, Wings Academy for young adults, The Bronx School for Law, Government and Justice, Validus Preparatory Academy, Bronx Expeditionary Learning High School, Bronx Academy of Letters, Herbert H. Lehman High School and High School of American Studies. The Bronx is also home to three of New York City's most prestigious private, secular schools: Fieldston, Horace Mann, and Riverdale Country School.

[The Bronx Academy of Letters is just the most recent editorial addition.] Now the Bronx High of Science and DeWitt Clinton Schools are well-known even far from New York, but (1) how many of the other listed public high schools are in principle notable (indeed "élite") enough to include here? and (2) what's a reasonable maximum number to preserve intelligibility and avoid having readers just skip over the whole paragraph?

I've never lived in the Bronx, and may never have set foot in the borough, but I've spent endless hours editing this article. However, as an outsider, I'm quite unqualified to make these judgements myself (maybe, for example, the High School for Violin & Dance is internationally-renowned or one of the Bronx's three or four most important public high schools), so could some local editors (or non-local editors who know a lot about New York's education system) offer some ideas on how to prune or reorganize this (preferably without offending good-faith editors with an honest but clear conflict of interest)? It's tiresome and will have to be unfair or unkind in some respects, but this article needs to avoid listing every high school in the Bronx (partially accomplished in several existing Wikipedia lists elsewhere). Thanks (and sorry I'm so long-winded). —— Shakescene (talk) 08:26, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Shakes, This once I disagree with you, in part. Sure the list is not informative per se, but it does provide a handy way to go to the pages of the specific schools in the Bronx. Perhaps someone is studying and comparing them. So we get a small list taking up little space which may provide useful pointers. Cheers, Bellagio99 (talk) 00:33, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

If that's the case or consensus, then perhaps a different format is needed, like a small box or a straight tabular list, one school per line. Fitting it into a long string-on prose sentence (where it's not always clear when a comma or conjunction is separating two schools and when, different parts of one school's name) really serves neither purpose well: good prose or a handy check-off list. —— Shakescene (talk) 06:37, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Race, ethnic section needs editing

It is filled with semi-redundancies and poorly organized. I am too lazy to do it, altho I did fix the Census para. Should we wait till 2010 census data are released. Bellagio99 (talk) 00:30, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Bold text and capitalization

(formerly section Capitalisation of the 'The' in 'The Bronx' and inclusion of the 'The' in the bold text in the lead, etc.) Recently, two editors have been reverting my edits [1] claiming that the 'The' should be inclusion in the bold text in the lead. To a minor extent, they are claiming that the 'The' in 'The Bronx' should always be capitalised. is this true? Epicgenius (talk) 16:19, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

• Dear Epi, This issue has been discussed to the death several times, and a strong consensus reached about including The. I know you're an experienced WikiEd, so when you go back thru The Bronx archives, you'll understand. Bellagio99 (talk) 21:01, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks for your query, Genius,

1. The discussion of including or excluding "The", and where "the" should be capitalized, as archived at Talk:The Bronx/Name, actually takes almost as much space (124,354 bytes before the present discussion gets added) as The Bronx itself (130,857 b), which has long pressed against the limits of WP:Article size. That doesn't forbid anyone from raising the issue again, of course, since consensus can change and there's sincere, genuine disagreement, but the last, widely-canvassed and well-debated Request for Comment, after allowing ample time, came out for restoring The Bronx with eleven comments in favor and four opposed.
   [N.B., I'm using U.S. spelling to follow WP:ENGVAR, despite being a native Londoner who still tends to favour Proper British Spelling, even after half a century living in the 'States.]
2. The general consensus, however, also (despite at least some real-world counter-examples) doesn't capitalize "The" in the middle of a sentence, unless the capitalization is part of a title such as The Bronx News or comes in a direct quotation from a source which capitalizes "The" mid-sentence. There's also the commonsense aversion to including "the" if another article, number or modifier is prefixed as in A Bronx Tale ("A the Bronx Tale" looks silly.)
3. But there's also a finer point: Should "The" be boldfaced at the start of the lede or introductory paragraph? I looked at the ledes for The Hague, The Gambia, The New York Times and The Washington Post (many of whose mentions, it's true will often capitalize "The" midsentence), and they all bold-face "The". The Bahamas is an exception ("The" isn't emphasized), but I'd differentiate that from The Bronx since The Bahamas is short for "Bahama Islands" as well as "Commonwealth of the Bahamas", while The Bronx is not modifying some implied noun, but can stand for the "Borough of the Bronx". I didn't do an extensive search of newspaper titles, but The New York Tribune is another exception, which I ascribe to the generally inconsistent real-world application of, and capitalization of, The to newspaper titles.
4. I recognize that some of these are rather nice points, and am quite open to hearing other approaches. —— Shakescene (talk) 06:06, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

• All right, I will read the archives over, because this seems like a controversial issue indeed. I was actually not trying to remove the 'The' from 'The Bronx'/'the Bronx', but the naming is very confusing. Epicgenius (talk) 15:17, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Song Artist Attribution Mistake

At the 'In Song' section, the song "Boogie Down Bronx" is incorrectly attributed to JVC Force, who are linked to Boogie Down Productions. In reality, Boogie Down Bronx is correctly attributed to Man Parrish in his discography on Wikipedia.

Citation here: http://www.discogs.com/Man-Parrish-Featuring-Freeze-Force-Boogie-Down-Bronx/release/33761

I have amended this personally and have noted this to inform the mods and to prevent edit wars.