Talk:Mott Haven, Bronx
 | New York City Unassessed | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
Up and Coming?!?!
"an up and coming neighborhood"?
Sounds like a real estate agent placed this. It may warrant deletion.
- Are you smoking crack you bought in that neighborhood??!
I was thinking just that (about the real-estate agent)! Made a few changes to make it a bit more honest, though it could prob. even be cleaned up more to reflect the truth about the current state of the area. I'm from Manhattan, but taught just north of there - a school I helped found is actually right near there on 139 & Willis. Justjared 21:34, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Added, Cited, Organized
Added in descriptions of the real problems in this neighborhood and some photographs. Mott Haven is one of the poorest neighborhoods in America and deals a long list of social problems. Do not let the real estate agents turn a fact based article into an advertisement. The area is not gentrifying. I also wanted to add the comments and linked article about the clocktower and lofts does not apply to Mott Haven but a small section of Port Morris adjacent the Third Avenue Bridge. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiwiki718 (talk • contribs) 02:06, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
You need proper citations and please do not ruin the formatting on the page
Starturtle73, your citation is based off an article from the real estate section of the NY Times and is written like an advertisement. You also should not delete cited paragraphs based on statistical data from government sources. I added "Mott Haven Historical Districts" to the "Land Use" category to keep the article organized. The original paragraph that described landmarked districts in Mott Haven was primarily a discussion on the Port Morris section of the Bronx and deleted. The landmarked details were never replaced. Now they are, with proper citations from the nyc.gov website. The small historic districts do not need to be mentioned outside that section of the article. They account for a very small area of the overall neighborhood, roughly 5 city blocks total. An even smaller percentage of the residential units in the area. When citing you need to include factual citations, not a sales pitch from a real estate add. Despite what you may read in the Times the neighborhood is not being gentrified. The dominant form of newly constructed housing in the area is low income. Subsidized townhouses, apartment buildings, and rehabilitations. Most of the new residents are low income and Hispanic. It is a very poor neighborhood with many social problems. Many issues not even mentioned in this article and I have slowly been adding details as I find reliable citations. These are the much more important issues that need discussed in the article. Trying to play it off as an up and coming area is not realistic. Port Morris just south of Mott Haven is seeing some gentrification adjacent the Third Avenue Bridge but it has been stagnant in recent years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiwiki718 (talk • contribs) 08:34, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- Wikiwiki718, Your edits are clearly biased towards focusing on your perceptions of social problems to the exclusion of anything else that is NORMALLY included in a encyclopedia article. I suggest you look at other Wikipedia articles on New York City neighborhoods, even historically blighted ones such as Bed-Stuy, to see what proper formatting and neutral content are. If you compare my edits, you will see that I always strive to include the contributions of other users, you, however, just treat others in this community with contempt. Making ad hominem attacks (where you attack the person rather than his ideas) doesn't justify your edits and is intellectually reprehensible. For example, I am not a real estate agent. Even if I were, that would not mean that my edits were automatically invalid. Also: do you really think that describing historic districts by what housing projects they are near is NEUTRAL??? Neutral would be stating the blocks they are located between. Where are your references for your claims about SROs? And using the New York Times or the NY Daily News as citations is perfectly valid, even if in your PERSONAL opinion they are not good papers. I did not quote any real estate ads, as you falsely claimed. Furthermore you have not properly cited demographic statistics--for example where did you get the total population of Mott Haven statistic? You referenced the Community Board 1 website, however they only give population statistics that include Port Morris as well. I am not sure what you have against accurately listing the subways that serve the area (look at the MTA map that I provided a link to if you have any doubt) or describing the actual boundaries of the neighborhood (again look at a map: the southern boundary of Mott Haven is not the Major Deegan--which is an elevated highway--it is the body of water called the Bronx Kill--it runs between Mott Haven and Randall's Island.) It really seems like you have some kind of agenda. Why don't you prove me wrong by editing your personal biases out of the page? Starturtle73 (talk • contribs) 08:45, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
The Bed-stuy article is not a model of neutrality. That article needs a major rewrite. You can not even tell Bed-stuy is a poor blighted African American community. There are three paragraphs in that article discussing gentrification and not one discussing the areas social problems. It is not balanced. It should tip towards describing the social problems in the community, land use, demographics and general information, then a brief discussion on the recent gentrification and effects on the community.
The reason I added the housing projects to the locations of the historical districts is becuase they are the most significant landmarks in the area. It also proves the point that the vast majority of the brownstones in the area were razed to build housing projects. Proximity.
As for Port Morris and Mott Haven. Two different neighborhoods. Port Morris is industrial, Mott Haven is residential. That is the easiest way to tell the two apart. The Major Deegan Expressway became a major boundary after it's construction. the Same goes for the Bruckner Expressway to the east.
Subway lines, I have no problem with listing subway lines since I was the one who added it to the opening paragraph... The area is served by the 6 line which operates along East 138th Street as I stated. The 4 train could added but then both should be added to a new section labeled transportation. I tried to keep the opening paragraph "general information". The 6 line is the primary line in the area and the 4 line station at East 138th Street and Grand Concourse sees little use in comparison.
BTW, I never called you a real estate agent, I said your citation was based off a real estate add. Feeling a little guilty?
Sorry but my edits are not biased. They are factual and I back them with statistical data, not real estate advertisements. Wikiwiki718 (talk) 09:57, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- Wikiwiki718, No, I am not feeling guilty. As I said, none of my information came from a real estate ad--I haven't even seen one for Mott Haven. I am feeling frustrated, however, because you think an encyclopedia article should fulfill your social agenda. That's not what encylopedia articles are for: they are there to inform. Not to "make your point". If you have an axe to grind, go blog about it, but stop wasting the public's time. Find me one other article on a New York City neighborhood (not edited by you) that mentions which police precinct patrols the neighborhood in the opening paragraph!!! And you claim to be NEUTRAL???
- Also, you did not really respond to most of my points about YOUR LACK OF REFERENCES. As for significant landmarks, no one actually living in Mott Haven refers to the landmarked districts by referring to the public housing projects. Their location is decribed using block numbers and avenues. Or local landmarks like supermarkets, restaurants, florist shops, the police station, the art gallery. Port Morris and Mott Haven are indeed different neighborhoods: Port Morris is the industrial area to the east of Mott Haven. However the distinctions are being blurred with the changes in zoning and socio-economic composition. This often happens in NYC--see the changing border of Chinatown in lower Manhattan. The area south of the elevated expressway is part of Mott Haven, hence the southern border is the Bronx Kill.
- In sum: Your opinions do not count as fact nor as statistics. Rather than just being defensive and territorial, why not work towards a more neutral article as determined by everyone in the community, not just you. You obviously like to think of yourself as having a social conscience, you ought to understand these principles. Starturtle73 (talk • contribs) 10:15, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
The reason why I call the New York Times article you posted a real estate advertisement is becuase it is directly from the real estate section of the New York Times. Just read it yourself and you will see what I mean. It attempts to generate hype. Some of the information is out of date. Some of it opinions.
How did I get the population data? I added the population in the census tracts within the confines of the area. That community board website posted as a citation in the demographics section offers data on income, race, nationality, population, ect. Every type of demographic data you could possibly need including maps and tables. I cited every paragraph I added except education which I will in time and urban renewal which is more common knowledge then anything. I have citations offering statistical data. Data directly from the US census interpreted by the community board, the NYCHA, the 40th precinct, charts based on statistical data on incarceration rates and drop outs, even a Bronx census data analysis. Read and you will see the references. There is a section towards the bottom labeled references if you did not notice.
The article is very neutral as I now edited it, replacing low income with "SoBro" is not neutral. Removing the area's public housing projects and social concerns is not neutral. Mott Haven is a high crime neighborhood with many social problems. Half the population lives in the projects. So how are you going to tell me removing that data makes it neutral, replacing it with "gentrification" and "SoBro"? When something is neutral, that means it contains factual data. The fact is, Mott Haven is a poor, inner city community, predominantly Puerto Rican and most people live in projects. That is neutral becuase it is fact. Removing that makes it bias by trying to make the area look better then it is.
The historical districts have now been added, I thought I had added it before but that has been corrected. If it makes you feel better I have no problem removing the public housing projects that surround the historic districts. I do not see how that is such a big problem becuase they are there either way.
As for the opening paragraph, I added general area information. Zip code, boundaries, local precinct, community board. Again I do not see the problem. How is that bias?
I also previously added the education section and urban renewal so before you jump the gun, you might want to read first. Wikiwiki718 (talk) 10:44, 4 March 2008 (UTC)