Jump to content

Talk:The Bronx: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 299: Line 299:
There is confusion between the text, the table herein, and specific Congressional district articles as to numbering and who the representatives are. Could someone sort it out? Perhaps [[User: epicgenius]]
There is confusion between the text, the table herein, and specific Congressional district articles as to numbering and who the representatives are. Could someone sort it out? Perhaps [[User: epicgenius]]
[[User:Bellagio99|Bellagio99]] ([[User talk:Bellagio99|talk]]) 21:17, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
[[User:Bellagio99|Bellagio99]] ([[User talk:Bellagio99|talk]]) 21:17, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
:{{u|Bellagio99}}, NY-13,14,15,16 are all in the Bronx. I didn't have time to look further. [[User:Epicgenius|epicgenius]] ([[User talk:Epicgenius|talk]]) 21:27, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:27, 30 August 2019

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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Speeditor (talk • contribs) 20:02, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalization again

Again, another discussion has started over capitalization, this time at my talk page. Epicgenius (talk) 19:54, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Five years later, the article seems to address the debate sufficiently, but I'm adding a new bit at the bottom of this page. Morganfitzp (talk) 04:03, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

East vs West Bronx

The current information at the top of the article about the division between the East and West Bronx and the size of the West Bronx relative to the East Bronx is incorrect. The West Bronx includes everything west of the Bronx River (the entire Annexed District), not just the area west of Jerome Avenue. Jerome Avenue just divides the street addresses, not the sections so there are buildings in the West Bronx with an "east" number. It's confusing, but it is true. This debate was resolved on the West Bronx page years ago. So saying that the West Bronx is 1/8th the size of the East Bronx is incorrect. I tried to fix this a couple days ago--in an admittedly clunky fashion--but the edit was reverted. I have no intention of starting an edit war so I'll leave it in the reverted form, but it is factually wrong if commonly believed. The lead in of this page as currently written is inconsistent with both the East and West Bronx pages. It would be nice if this could be discussed here and a solution found (6 Aug 2014). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.59.43.69 (talk) 13:48, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Joestanza (talk) 14:06, 1 February 2015 (UTC) There are several users involved in deleting external links maliciously without cause.[reply]

What can be done about this?

The reliability of Welcome2TheBronx was questioned yet it is he most quoted source in the mainstream media in the Bronx and has created news stories that are eventually picked up by the mainstream media including the New York Times, NY1, Daily News, Pix11, The Atlantic, Bronx News12 just to name a few. It's Founder and Editor is also a source that is constantly quoted in articles by the NYtimes, NY1, Bronx News12, New York Daily News and many others.

It's reliability is very well established and can be verified by a simple look at its media press page (a large number of recent articles have yet to be added including a recent one in the new York Times from Jan 2nd 2015 (yet another one from that newspaper alone. If Welcome2TheBronx isn't a reliable source, the New York Times or Daily News and NY1 or others would not turn to the page constantly for quotes)

Now, a recent unknown Editor has taken it upon themselves to delete ALL links in that section and not just Welcome2TheBronx. At this point this is just simply abuse.

  • It has been 2 editors who have removed the external link, not just one
  • Cite your sources: who says W2TB is reliable? Has the NY Times or Daily Mail discussed its investigative journalism or reliability? If they have, where and when?
  • Stop accusing other editors of malice. In fact, stop assuming anything about any editor anywhere on Wikipedia. Our actions speak for themselves and do not need speculating on emotions or causes.
  • Yes, I deleted all the purported "newspaper" links, as none of them seem reliable. Some do not have articles, and those that do are plastered with "Citation needed". Not exactly the reliable stuff wanted for external links.
  • 73.17.21.143 (talk) 14:21, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]


    • I am not going to comment on whether to link any individual website or not... Just a note on policy for all involved... External links (EL) are governed by our WP:External links guideline, and NOT our WP:Reliable sources (RS) guideline (WP:RS is for sources used as citations). The standards for what is acceptable (or not) as an EL are different from our standards for what is acceptable (or not) as an RS. Blueboar (talk) 14:52, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Based on information and links provided this topic by Blueboar, the external link of Welcome2TheBronx meets the criteria. The other links are actually questionable at best because they do not all meet the criteria but personally a non issue to me since a few of those sites are valuable.

According to WP guidelines for external links it states the following on blogs that shouldn't be used EXCEPT under the following conditions: "11.Blogs, personal web pages and most fansites, except those written by a recognized authority. (This exception for blogs, etc., controlled by recognized authorities is meant to be very limited; as a minimum standard, recognized authorities who are individuals always meet Wikipedia's notability criteria for people.)" Welcome2TheBronx's Editor and Founder meets this criteria as Wikipedia states: "Editors may also use material from reliable non-academic sources, particularly if it appears in respected mainstream publications. Other reliable sources include: university-level textbooks books published by respected publishing houses magazines journals mainstream newspapers." This has been further established by numerous references in The New York Times, New York Daily News, NY1, and many other reliable sources and sites. Examples are: http://m.nydailynews.com/new-york/bronx/bronx-hipsters-final-frontier-article-1.1537940

http://m.nydailynews.com/new-york/bronx/bronx-nonprofit-moving-melrose-article-1.1768119

http://m.nydailynews.com/new-york/bronx/bronx-celebrity-superhero-saving-stranded-cat-article-1.1829386

http://m.nydailynews.com/new-york/bronx/bronx-booming-boutique-luxury-hotels-article-1.1937956

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/20/nyregion/friends-hope-death-wont-doom-a-devotee-of-bronx-history-to-oblivion.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/07/nyregion/for-fans-in-bronx-lopezs-homecoming-was-overdue.html

http://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/lens/2013/10/23/street-art-from-the-south-bronx-to-soweto/

http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20131217/concourse/landmark-commission-decries-demolition-of-castle-on-concourse


Joestanza (talk) 16:37, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That only proves that Welcome2TheBronx published the story first. It may not be a reliable source, as the other newspapers (Daily News, NY Times, DNAInfo, etc.) probably did some research of their own confirming the stories from Welcome2TheBronx. Epic Genius (talk) 20:25, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Timeline of the Bronx

What is missing from the recently created Bronx timeline article? Please add relevant content! Contributions welcome. Thank you. -- M2545 (talk) 18:20, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 26 external links on The Bronx. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:28, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Revitalization

Need feedback and help. I made some corrections to the headings which can be easily reverted, no problem, no hard feelings. It seems to me that all of the references to the revitalization of the Bronx is current development and do not belong as just the conclusion to the history section. For now it's an independent section after the history. Perhaps the section should be moved to another location, like after Geography or Demographics. BrandenburgG (talk) 15:42, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's really a part of history (revitalization comes after degradation), and the currency of the situation just means that it will be history later on, when more things start to happen. Whether in the past or in the present, gentrification is still considered a part of the chronology. So it should really stay where it is. epicgenius @ 00:12, 2 April 2016 (UTC) (talk) 00:12, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I will change it back to "History" for now. I still debate this in my own mind, though. If a reader wants information about how the Bronx IS, will he or she look for the information in a section about how it WAS? Any more thoughts?

1930s history may need rethinking

As currently written, the history of the Bronx is of decline 1930s-1960s. Yet my own family's history is that they and their friends and family moved to the Bronx in the 1930s because the IND D train opened up fast commuting to midtown Manhattan. They moved into legions of newly-built 6-storey apartment buildings. This does not seem like decline to me. Nor, in my own lifetime, was there much sense of decline in the West Bronx in the 1950s. Bellagio99 (talk) 23:11, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wave Hill Images

The images are nice, but would be improved by linking to text in the article. Could you add a few sentence kalifonza? Bellagio99 (talk) 21:11, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on The Bronx. 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) 21:43, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on The Bronx. 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) 01:58, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on The Bronx. 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) 06:04, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Bronx. 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) 00:47, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Festivals and Parades

I added a sub-sub-subsection in the "Culture" subsection about the numerous festivals and parades, expressions of community spirit and heritage. It's not yet inclusive, more can be added.BrandenburgG (talk) 16:35, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wondering if it's getting time to split this into separate articles (History of The Bronx, Geography of The Bronx, etc). It's a pretty big hunk of text all in one article. -- RoySmith (talk) 20:50, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New Transportation

I added some new information about the new ferry service from Soundview, new proposed Metro-North stations, and introduced the term "subway desert." BrandenburgG (talk) 17:42, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Gangs

@RoySmith: I agree that a great level of detail in the "Gangs" section is not appropriate for this article. However, the IP user's edits look like they're in good faith. It seems appropriate to add an overview with links, which is what I've done. epicgenius (talk) 19:46, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Epicgenius and Nichlauskapp: I see this has been reverted again, back to the original text. I also notice there's a Draft:Gangs of the Bronx; that seems like a reasonable place for this material, and all we need for this article is a short summary and a pointer to there once that hits mainspace. In fact, that draft looks like it's reasonably well written and referenced; if submitted for review, I would imagine it would be accepted without much trouble. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:06, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@RoySmith and Nichlauskapp: The draft is a good start - it needs to be cleaned up a little for style, but I think it can be accepted afterward. I think there may also be other gangs in the Bronx too. epicgenius (talk) 02:42, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Architecture in The Bronx

'm starting a longish project to document all the significant architecture in The Bronx. Buildings that don't currently have articles about them will get them written (assuming I can find suitable WP:RS), and the buildings photographed. Please take a look at User talk:RoySmith/Architecture in The Bronx and add suggestions for other notable buildings. Create new sections for styles as required. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:17, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Demographics -- White Alone/Non-Hispanic White percent

This is for accuracy in the demographics section. I noticed that under the demographics section that it says that "whites" are 45.8% of the Bronx population, yet there are sources from the state of New York that show that the non-Hispanic white population is actually less than 10% of the population of the Bronx, down from being more than 1/3rd of the population in the 1980s. For accuracy, perhaps the non-hispanic white population should be noted by itself as under 10%. The source that i have is from the "office of the new york state comptroller" website itself.

Website: [1] PDF from there: [2]

The relevant information from the pdf is: "Blacks or African Americans represented 29 percent of the population, a share that has remained relatively steady for decades. Whites were less than 10 percent, down from more than one-third in 1980. The number of Asian residents has nearly quadrupled since 1980, but represented only 3 percent of the population." 2600:1700:1EC1:30C0:19CA:9C18:9C94:99DB (talk) 04:10, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@2600:1700:1EC1:30C0:19CA:9C18:9C94:99DB: I'm not an expert in demographics, but if there is conflicting info from the state it seems appropriate to include it in the demographics section along with a citation. However, I wouldn't remove what is already there. Others who have worked more with demographic data may have other opinions. Emjackson42 (talk) 15:53, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ https://www.osc.state.ny.us/
  2. ^ https://osc.state.ny.us/osdc/rpt4-2019.pdf

Definite and indefinite articles in this article

In this article's section about The Bronx's definite article (and its requisite capitalization subplot) there is a sentence that currently reads:

"Some people and groups refer to the borough with a capital letter at all times, such as Lloyd Ultan, a Bronx County Historical Society historian."

I notice here that its "a Bronx County Historical Society historian." Should it be "a The Bronx County Historical Society historian" since this section establishes that "Bronx" is always preceded by the definite article (whose requisite capitalization remains in question)? Morganfitzp (talk) 04:11, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No, that would be poor English. But you could change it to "Bronx historian Lloyd Ultan". Station1 (talk) 00:04, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
How about "The Bronx historian Lloyd Ultan?" Morganfitzp (talk) 15:48, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, but "the" would not be capitalized. In this case "Bronx" functions as an adjective, modifying "the historian". You could just say "the historian Lloyd Ultan". Station1 (talk) 19:15, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:36, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Impossible statistic

Under Demographics, in the 1st paragraph, the article says that 45.8% of the Bronx's population is white. This fact is also mentioned in the following paragraph.

But in the second paragraph the article says "There is an 89.7 chance that any two residents, chosen at random, would be of different race or ethnicity." Mathematically, this is impossible. If 45.8% are white, then if you choose 2 residents at random there will be .458 x .458 = .210 = 21.0% chance that they will both be white. So claiming that there's an 89.7% chance they'll be of different ethnicity is clearly wrong.

It gets worse. The article says 43.3% are black / African American. So, by the same arithmetic, there's an 18.7% chance they'll both be black. Add the 18.7 to the 21.0 calculated above and it's clear that there is at least a 39.7% chance they will have the same ethnicity.

The article cites the Census Bureau for the impossible statistic. I presume that whoever placed that statistic in the article misstated the Census Bureau's explanation of what phenomenon had a 89.7% chance of occurring. It would be nice to read the Census Bureau reference and then correct the statistic in the article, but the link to the reference does not work. I'm loath to delete something just because I'm not smart enough to locate the reference, but if no one can locate the reference then the statistic should be deleted from the article.

--AlanJohnZimmermann (talk) 12:16, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Congressional district numbering and representatives

There is confusion between the text, the table herein, and specific Congressional district articles as to numbering and who the representatives are. Could someone sort it out? Perhaps User: epicgenius Bellagio99 (talk) 21:17, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bellagio99, NY-13,14,15,16 are all in the Bronx. I didn't have time to look further. epicgenius (talk) 21:27, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Bronx&oldid=913245582"