Talk:Buffalo, New York

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of the New York State WikiProject, an attempt to better organize and improve articles related to the U.S. state of New York. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

	Buffalo, New York is part of WikiProject Lakes, a WikiProject which aims to systematically improve lake-related articles using the tools on the Project page. You are welcome and encouraged to edit the article attached to this page and to join the project.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

Archives /Archive 1

[edit] Climate

Climate is defined as the average weather over a long period of time. Storms are singular events that all together could be climate, but are not climate alone. I know that the NWS is saying that this was the worst storm in 137 years, but really if we are going to list this storm then we should also list other storms. OK so lets start a list, how about the blizzard of 1980, 1984, the freak storm of November 20, 2000, Christmas 2001. I'm sure that there are more that I'm forgetting, but I think that you can see my point that if we list all of the bad storms that have hit Buffalo just in the last 20 or 30 years, you are going to have a good sized list. Also, how do we decide if a storm is bad enough to be listed here? 1 foot, 2 feet of snow? How strong do the winds have to be? How much damage? Bottom line, is it encyclopedic to list storms in the climate section in an article on Buffalo? If someone really feels passionate about this, perhaps an article about Buffalo's weather is a better place for such information. T.C. 11:49, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Dude, this is a natural disaster on a massive scale. Prague has its 2002 flood on its page, New Orleans has a whole section on Katrina on its page. If you don't like it in the climate section, move it into history, but don't simply remove it. This isn't a case of "it's Buffalo, snow happens, deal with it." This storm has caused 10 "snow days" in a row for the most-affected of the North Towns, that's simply unprecedented. It would be remiss for an "encyclopedic" source to not mention this storm, which has changed the face of the city due to the tremendous loss of trees. Jskelly 17:11, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Correction: ten snow days in a row also happened during the Blizzard of 77. Which is mentioned in the Climate section... Jskelly 17:20, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

How do we decide to list a storm? Simple: if it is uniquely damaging, as the National Weather Service's Buffalo office said this one was. Look at their web site, if you don't believe me. Even the November 2000 monster was listed "only" as 5 stars, this one was "5-plus" (their term).

As to how to handle multiple events: Create a "List of significant storms of Buffalo, New York" entry.

I simply don't agree that this is "a natural disaster on a massive scale." Had the same storm hit later with no leaves on the trees, no one would have cared and we would not be having this conversation. I haven't watched the news for the last day or to, but last I knew 11 people died total, a bunch of people didn't have electricity for a few days and we have to pick up a bunch of trees. One day later, I was going out to the bars and clubs downtown and I ate and a nice restaurant on Saturday night. One week later, pretty much everything is back to normal, save a few people without power and some trees to get picked up. The two examples that were given were very different. In New Orleans 1500 people died and 80% of the city was uninhabitable for months. More then a year later, they are still cleaning up. I am not very familiar with the Prague, however, they had to evacuate the whole city. Have we ever evacuated Buffalo?

I'm not sure how you are defining 'snow days', but I usually think of snow days as days kids have off of school. Being that the storm hit 7 days prior to the comments you wrote on 19-OCT-2006 I think that it would be hard to have caused 10 'snow days' at that point. I think that most schools had off the Friday after the storm and then the whole following week - adding to 6 in my count. Also, most of these days off of school can be attributed to people not wanting their kids to walk near downed trees for fear that there might be downed power lines in them. I missed the Friday from work, but I have had work every day since, and I also never missed a day of grad school either.

This conversation has fragmented a bit, please see the October Storm section and the Trees damaged in storm section below for further comments.

I admit the october storm was eventful. I got married in a church with no electricity and lost heat in my home. Those pictures dont really do it justice. It was worse in the city than the pictures make it look. However I do not think it is worth metioning so much with no mention to our other major storms. The Blizzard of 77 was alot worse. Check out the Science Museum, they are celebrating the anniversiry. Also the storms of 98 I belive it was when we set a record for snowfall in 24 hours. Then the storm of Christmas 2001 and Nov of 2000 that left the whole city stranded.Im sure there was alot of significant weather in our 200 year history to cut down on the October storm.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Talk:%22Friday_the_13%22_Buffalo%2C_New_York_snow_storm_in_pictures"

T.C. 11:38, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

This is a response to the unsigned comment a few lines above that describes the impact of the storm. I am posting this because I don't think that post accurately conveys the extent of the storm for the purpose of discussing its inclusion in Wikipedia. This may not be the best place for this post, but it should be clarified that power was out for over a week in some areas in and around Buffalo after the 10/13/2006 storm, and my apartment, as an example, didn't have all its utilities restored until 10/30/2006. As of today (a month and a day later,) cleanup crews are still working to remove debris from the streets and sidewalks, and this affects many residents' commutes and daily lives. Also, the city's parks/parkways system, which is on the national register of historic places, has been severely damaged, and it will take an estimated "two generations" of time for the landscape of the parks system to fully recover from the storm, according to reports from local media. This is not to say that i agree or disagree with anyone in terms of how the storm and its aftermath should be recognized in this article, but if the storm is going to be included in Wikipedia, the scope of the thing should be objectively presented, no matter where or how it's recognized. --Danreitz 07:47, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Golden Horseshoe

What's up with the golden horseshoe reference in the opening section? The golden horseshoe Wikipedia entry does not mention Buffalo, even though the metropolitan area it describes does not stop at the border and continues into Buffalo. Is the Golden Horseshoe specifically a Canadian term, or is Buffalo considered part of the region? Is there a good non-wikipedia source that can clarify? --Danreitz 07:47, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

I live in a suburb of Buffalo and have never heard the term "golden horseshoe"

[edit] Less of a tourist guide?

Guys, I would love to see Buffalo tourism increased, and there would be nothing better than a yummy Buffalo junk food tour, but Wiki isn't really the place to engage in pizza joint link debates. I pulled out the LaNova link, which had replaced the "justpizza.com" link, because it's just an advertisement. If there's a good informational site about WNY pizza, that's what we ought to link to. I'm sure that someone, somewhere has a page. There are tons of little Buffalo-isms that I like and find amusing, but they aren't really Wiki-material, and they aren't NPOV. (Heck, I kind of like my mom's friends description of the place as "a drinking town with a sports problem," but that doesn't fit into the main article, and shouldn't. On the other hand, Buffalo's cultural obsession with sports is relevant information, as it's part of the everyday culture of the city. Wish I'd taken a picture of the church announcement board with Bills prayers that I saw on my last visit!) I think we need to work on the tone of this article, which is really getting to the level of, "No, really, Buffalo's not uncool! We've got lots of cool stuff!" Miss w 02:47, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I wouldn't say the entire article reads like that, but definately much of the Culture section. Everything before it stays in a factual enyclopedic style of writing. --Cityhall 12:48, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, agreed. I think it was mostly the culture section I was wincing at when I wrote the comment. Miss w 13:59, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SPAM

I tried to add a link to www.buffalorising.com as it's one of the fast growing media sources in WNY, and it's used by a ton of expatriates to keep in touch with Buffalo affairs. Wiki deleted the link arguing that it was spam, but it wasn't. It really is the best Buffalo-focused website - much better and more hyperlocal content than the Buffalo News site. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.162.204.186 (talk • contribs) 02:54, 4 January 2007 69.162.204.186.

Yeah I agree that BuffaloRising is a good website that has some good information about Buffalo. The thing that you do not realize is that they are not doing this for the betterment of Buffalo, but rather they are making a profit. If you go to their webpage there are ads all over it. They also have a free magazine that is filled with ads. They make money by selling web and print ad space. The more visitors or copies distributed, the higher the price that they can change for ads. When they have links from other webpages they get increased traffic. That is good for them, however it is not a community like Wikipedia that should be used to help someone else make money. There are plenty of other sites like this that could be added, like Artvoice or Buffalo News or Buffalo.com or The Beast et al, but they are commercial sites. Look at all of the links here - none of them have ads on them. You could start a separate article on BuffaloRising and link to that, but there should not be a link directly to a commercial site. Remember this is a .com not a .org. T.C. 12:46, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I can't speak to why the Buffalo Rising crew is producing Buffalo Rising, as I don't know their motives. I suspect you don't either, so indicating that they are doing it only to 'make a profit' is probably a bit unfair. After all, it's a Buffalo-based company. What isn't Buffalo-based and/or Buffalo-owned are all the other media entries listed in the Buffalo article - WGRZ, WIVB, WKBW, etc. All of those media companies have listings and links to their sites. And their sites are REALLY covered in ads (unlike the Buffalo Rising site which has some ads but isn't overdone). As I understand it, the point of Wikipedia entries like this is to provide information to people on the topic at hand. I think links to the Buffalo News, Artvoice and Buffalo Rising would help do that, as it gives people insight into what's happening in and around Buffalo. That these are commercial entities is irrelevant to me. And apparently it's irrelevant to the Wiki police who've left all the other Buffalo media entries up on the site.

Or is it that you can only link to huge national media corporations and not grassroots media companies? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.162.204.186 (talk • contribs) 01:31, 6 January 2007.

Just looking through the Buffalo article, there are actually very few external links, in comparison to some other articles. The media links which were mentioned are not links to the stations' websites, but are internal Wikipedia links. If Buffalorising.com can meet the requirements of WP:N then I suggest a page be started for it, and that can be linked from this page.

One other comment - it should not matter whether a site is a .com or .org or whatever - those designations don't mean much in today's internet. -- Alucard (Dr.) 14:06, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

I removed the Buffalo Rising link AGAIN. I agree with Alucard (Dr.) that you should start a wikipedia article about Buffalo Rising just as they have for the TV and radio stations. This is the difference here. If you can really write an article that is WP:N then you can link it here.

BTW I do also agree that .com and .org really don't mean that much anymore, but I think that the point is that Buffalo Rising is using advertising to make money. I'm not sure why 69.162.204.186 thinks that one cannot make this determination. If Buffalo Rising was a non-profit then maybe I could understand and maybe they would be BuffaloRising.org. What do you think that they do with the money they get from ads? Do you think that they'll use it to repave Elmwood or Allen Streets? Well they both could use a re-paving. Somewho I doubt that this would be the case. Furthermore remember that this is an encyclopedia and not a news article, "finding out what is going on around the area" is not the goal of an encyclopedia. I suspect that the only reason that you care so much is that you work for Buffalo Rising, otherwise you would have also added the links to Buffalo News, Artvoice etc.

Also, please sign your comments with ~~~~, I added the unsigned sig to both of your posts

T.C. 11:49, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Redundant: Demographics section and Diversity section

It's well and good to call attention to the city's role in the Underground Railroad but the UR has nothing to do with the concentration of African-Americans on the East Side. Remember, the point of escaping slavery was to get into Canada, especially after the Fugitive Slave Act was passed. The East Side did not gain large numbers of African Americans until the Great Migration of the early 20th century. I'll rewrite.

Shouldn't the demographics and diversity sections be merged, seeing as "diversity" is a reflection of an area's demographic composition? This might help make the article sound more encyclopedic and less apologetic.Grzond 14:17, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure. The demo section is dedicated to statistical data that goes beyond numbers based on race. The diversity section talks about ethnicity and benefits from it. I don't think they should be merged but I think the diversity section should be cleaned up or just elimated all together. --Cityhall 19:07, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Seal

I've been working on the articles for the flag and seal and discovered that the seal on the page isn't correct. I'll be changing that shortly. --Cityhall 19:52, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] West Side

The West side no longer poscesses a strong Italian culture. Many busninesses are owned by Italians in some parts of the West Side, but they have long since moved to North Buffalo or to the suburbs. The Italian names on some of these businesses may have caused the confusion. The strongest cultural influence in the west side is Latino culture. Roc 06:48, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

True. I live near the West Side and shop and bike around there a lot. If it's any indication of demographic reality, Hispanic culture is dominant in terms of storefronts and church names, although there are great Italian shops that still exist in the Grant Street area. My biking and shopping experience tell me that North Buffalo has a stronger Italian influence. But this is all purely observational. If there is a non-wikipedia source that accurately reflects the 2006 demographic information on Buffalo regions and neighborhoods, its information should be used and referenced. --Danreitz 07:47, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Population

The Census Bureau reports the population of the City of Buffalo for the year 2000 to be 292,648: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/36/3611000.html Not sure where the number 692,648 came from. Pfly 05:08, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Wishful thinking? :) Vesperholly 07:07, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cultural Center & St. Lawrence Seaway

A couple questions about a couple statements in the article.

"Buffalo's thriving arts, cultural, and nightlife scenes is considered the hub of the greater bi-national region in New York and Ontario."

I'm not sure what the "greater bi-national region in New York and Ontario" means exactly, but I always thought of Toronto as the big city hub of the region. As kids in Buffalo we always listened to Toronto radio stations and watched TV broadcast from there, which was much more interesting than the stuff being broadcast in Buffalo, generally. This sentence sounds odd to me. Toronto is the regional hub!

"The city's importance declined in the later half of the 20th century for several reasons, perhaps the most devastating being the opening of the St. Lawrence Seaway in 1957."

This surprised me. My understanding of the St. Lawrence Seaway is that is has failed to become what it was supposed to be. Just after it opened, large cargo ships switched to even-larger, specialized container shipping, which are too big for the seaway and require specialized ports that don't exist on the Great Lakes. Furthermore, the Erie Canal page says:

"In 1905, construction of the New York State Barge Canal began, which was completed in 1918 at a cost of $101 million; freight traffic reached a total of 5.2 million tons by 1951 before declining in the face of combined rail and truck competition.".

Nothing about the St. Lawrence Seaway being the "most devastating" factor in its, or Buffalo's decline. I'd think the decline of Buffalo as a transportation hub is due most directly to the emergence of container shipping on the oceans and the boom of truck-based shipping, with rail taking over the niches of coal and ore shipping. Pfly 05:49, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] October Storm

I'd like to help expand a stub on our October storm, but really til now my major "contributions" to Wikipedia have been, like, correcting typos and adding the occasional interesting tidbit to 'external links.' There seem to be three names the storm is going by so far, either October Storm; Friday the thirteenth storm; or "Columbus Day storm" (which is silly, as it happened days after Colombus Day. I get the feeling this one was used more by national media than anyone here on the ground). I realize there is usually a process which includes discussion and so on regarding creation of yet another new stub; so I don't really feel comfortable creating and properly naming one myself, being such a newbie. But if the Blizzard of 77 deserves its own article, this storm certainly does. And I'm sure no article on it exists yet -- it hadn't even been referenced yet in the main Buffalo article, and I did try searching on relevent key words. Guidance would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jskelly (talk • contribs) 02:04, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Only time will tell whether or not it deserves an article... if you want to create one, just do it. Everything is fixable, so it'll just be a learning experience. People will fix the article up if necessary. Just make sure everything has references--you're not supposed to come up with a name for the storm, you should use the name that other published sources use. (We're not a primary source... we're secondary or tertiary).

Also, on Talk pages put the new discussion at the bottom and sign your notes with four tildes, like this: ~~~~. Good luck! ~MDD 46 96 02:35, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks very very much! The three names I listed have all been used by primary/published sources, but so far there doesn't seem to be a trend of one of them being favored over the other two. I imagine the "Great Lakes Blizzard of 1977" wasn't coined just five days into the storm either, and I remember the Loma Prieta earthquake pretty well, and it also didn't come to be so named for... I don't know how long, but I'm pretty sure it was not within five days either. Most often, news sources are just calling it "the freak October snowstorm that devastated the Buffalo area." But I guess that when it does get an official name later, the page can be renamed and redirected? Although that's not ideal, I think -- but I guess it's really all I can do in the absence of an actual official name right now. The recent Hawaii earthquake's article is called

2006 Hawaii earthquake

And I also found this

Storm of October 1804

so I wonder if I should call it something that's somewhat parallel to either one of those. In any case, I will do my best, and I do thank you very much for noticing my post and taking the time to reply. Jskelly 16:33, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Why was my link to a governmental web site, describing the storm, pulled? In light of the fact that this storm downed so many trees, the link should either be restored or become a separate entity. Pulling it smacks of childish denial.

User T.C. who started the "Climate" thread, above, gives his/her reasoning for pulling it in said thread. Obviously I don't agree =) I don't think it really matters if the storm is mentioned in "Climate" or "History" or some other appropriate place -- but I do think it's major enough to be in there. I had put it in Climate originally because that's where the Blizzard of 77 was mentioned, and since this Lake Storm "Aphid" was also a lake effect event, it seemed to me to fit there best. Jskelly 23:17, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

PS Denial is a good term for it

I've added a mention of the October storm in the climate section as a specific event related to the effect of snow on the city... I see this as a compromise. Feel free to change the wording if you can make the sentence better. ~MDD 46 96 14:27, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

"I admit the october storm was eventful. I got married in a church with no electricity and lost heat in my home. Those pictures dont really do it justice. It was worse in the city than the pictures make it look. However I do not think it is worth metioning so much with no mention to our other major storms. The Blizzard of 77 was alot worse. Check out the Science Museum, they are celebrating the anniversiry. Also the storms of 98 I belive it was when we set a record for snowfall in 24 hours. Then the storm of Christmas 2001 and Nov of 2000 that left the whole city stranded.Im sure there was alot of significant weather in our 200 year history to cut down on the October storm." Retrieved from http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Talk:%22Friday_the_13%22_Buffalo%2C_New_York_snow_storm_in_pictures —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.162.211.172 (talk • contribs) 07:08, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Regents vs. local?

If we're going to get into the subject of the Regents exam and "encouraging" vs. "requiring" (the Regents page suggests that non-Regents diploma is still possible, though I'd heard rumors to the contrary), maybe some comment on the possibility of a non-Regents diploma is in order? Otherwise, it might be better to simply mention that students have a choice between the local diploma and the Regents one. (A breakdown of how NYS education works is probably a topic beyond the scope of the Buffalo article, though it might be worthwhile to mention how Buffalo's local diploma may differ from the Regents. Miss w 14:53, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

If the local diploma doesn't require a regents exam, then it most defintly is different --T-rex 22:20, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Looking at the Regents page, it looks like the same set-up I remember from growing up in Perry--you had a choice between the local and the Regents. I had heard that the Regents had since become required, but that's not reflected in the Regents article, so either I heard wrong (more than possible), or it's a local choice whether or not to require the Regents. What is Buffalo's stance on it? I went to the Board of Ed page and didn't find reference to what the graduation requirements are. If there is a local diploma option, it might be worthwhile in the article to mention how the Buffalo local diploma differs from the Regents in its requirements. Miss w 13:43, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't really know about the inner city, but most of the surrounding schools no longer offer local diplomas as an option (buffalo however still might) --T-rex 14:20, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Trees damaged in storm

I removed the sentence about trees damaged in the recent snow storm because I don't believe it's relevant to a general article about a city. Anyways, it's too soon to say whether or not the damage will have any lasting impact. As far as discussing my removal goes, with a well-established article like this, things should be discussed before they are added, not before they're removed. ~MDD 46 96 06:54, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I removed something along the same lines myself, so I think thats right move in this case. That said the storm my actually warrent a seperate article of its own anyways (see discussion along those lines above...) --T-rex 07:04, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I do think you are being a bit self-absorbed. Just because you got back to work and to normal so easily, and just because it didn't impact you personally so much, doesn't mean it isn't significant. You are not being objective: under what circumstances would you agree that it is significant? If damage totals reach 100 million? If kids are home from school for two weeks (schools never close like this unexpectedly if they can at all help it)... Or what? I did make a separate page about the storm, but how are people to find it if it's not referenced on the main page?

With regard to examples like Katrina, the Hawaii earthquake, and the Prague flood: Hawaii had no fatalities, but much damage, and it's listed. In Prague they didn't evacuate the whole city, just one district. Prague got mostly back to normal pretty quickly afterwards, but the flood was still significant. And with Katrina, we've got quotes from FEMA officials saying the damage here in Buffalo is worse than Katrina's damage. No matter how you look at it, the storm and damage were both significant. This is supposed to be an encyclopedia, not a PR page. Are you sure you're not just removing this because you don't want Buffalo to "look bad?" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jskelly (talk • contribs) .

Yea I'm pretty sure. In the scope of 200 years a single week off of school is pretty insignificant. Anyone who says that the damage here is worse then Katrina is absolutly clueless. Not having power for a few days, although newsworthy is not significant to the overall history of the city. --T-rex 14:18, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I didn't present the quote as well as I should have, and I apologize for that. The exact quote was "I went through Katrina, and I'll tell you what," FEMA's Michael S. Beeman said. "There are communities there that don't have as much damage as you do." Cleanup costs top $135 million. In the scope of the city's 200-year history, this is being called the worst storm in, well, in the city's 200-year history. Again, I repeat: if you are not following the story, you shouldn't be making this judgement call. If you are following the story, I don't see how you can consider it not significant. Apologies also for forgetting to sign my prev. post. Is it bad etiquette to go back and sign it now? Jskelly 15:58, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

It's not bad etiquette :). Everyone makes mistakes sometimes. ~MDD 46 96 03:10, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

OK, so let me get this straight: The trees are important enough to mention in the parks section, but widespread devastation to them isn't? And in the scope of the city's "200-year history," the fact that Squeaky Wheel rents video equipment to local artists for but a nominal fee is significant? Historically? In the long run? Jskelly 17:51, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Jskelly, your comments sound very standoffish and may create defensive reactions rather than constructive discussion. We're all working together toward the same goal: creating a high quality article about Buffalo. Please be open to others' opinions on this matter. Also, don't forget that Wikipedia articles are created by many people, and that quality varies. You have a valid point about the Squeaky Wheel, let's not judge this topic by that standard.

Please be careful to avoid original research. The only judgement call we have to make here is whether or not the storm is relevant to a general article about Buffalo. Anything beyond that, like whether or not the storm had a long-lasting impact or changed the cityscape, is for primary or secondary sources to decide.

So... the issue at hand. Right now we are still looking at the event with a high power lens. Perhaps one year from now people will still be talking about how Buffalo is different as a result of the storm, or perhaps not. We simply do not know yet. While the note about damage to trees is most certainly relevant to an article about the storm itself, is it really relevant to an article about Buffalo in general? If we had a main article about Buffalo weather, it would definately warrant a mention.

I definately don't think that this storm warrants more than a single line in the entire article. However, since we don't have a general article about weather in Buffalo, it probably deserves some mention. I just want the storm to fit in context the same way it fits in Buffalo's weather history--as a rare exception, or a footnote. ~MDD 46 96 03:10, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Dear MDD -- thanks for your comments as always. I didn't mean to sound standoffish or aggressive, and I certainly don't have any interest in flame wars. I had meant to ask what I still think is a pretty valid question: under what standards would those who don't think the storm had significant impact be willing to change their minds? For instance, the "major disaster area" designation, or a certain dollar amount's worth of damage. Sorry if I came off a bit testy, but I probably was feeling frustrated at the time. I agree that a separate article on weather/storms would probably be quite nifty; also that the storm doesn't deserve more than a single line in the main article. Thanks Jskelly 19:28, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Television and Radio History

An anon recently added two very long sections about Buffalo's television and radio history, but cited no sources. I am hesitant to remove them, because they don't appear to be copyvios... but still, we really need references there. ~MDD 46 96 21:12, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

The two sections were copied verbatim from http://www.buffalobroadcasters.com/hist_buffradio.asp and http://www.buffalobroadcasters.com/hist_bufftv.asp. --Davepape 00:36, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lake effect page: out or in?

I added an external link to the lake effect web page at NOAA's Buffalo office. The NOAA climate link in the same group of external links has a broken link to the main page, so one cannot find this information in that way. Yet, someone took it upon themselves to remove this link and call it not relevant. I think it should be left in. BTW, I'm a former resident of Monroe and Wayne counties. MWS 16:41, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] History needs to be split off/cleaned up

I've created a split off page for the history section as it's obvious that the history is too lengthy to be contained in this article. I suggest we begin the process of trimming down what's on the Buffalo page down to a skeletal outline with a link to the history page.--Loodog 04:20, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for making that split page. I have edited this article to replace the stuff you copied with a very brief summary. Hopefully now any changes that need to be made can be made to the History article, rather than the main article. -- Alucard (Dr.) | Talk 19:19, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Television and Radio station lists

I notice that we have just added a list of radio statsion to this quite long article. Since we already have categories [Category:Television_stations_in_Buffalo} and Category:Radio_stations_in_Buffalo%2C_New_York which are referred to on this page, do we really need to duplicate those lists here? -- Alucard (Dr.) 15:31, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, under the be bold motif, I have replaced the long lists with the templates that are used on the individual station pages. This reduces the size of the page and also cuts down the number of lists of identical stuff we have to maintain. -- Alucard (Dr.) | Talk 19:09, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Right on - they look good, though I think the section should be moved down a bit in the article (or, at least, to just below the transportation section). The boxes, I feel, tend to give a sense of finality to an article, since they usually occur at the bottom of most articles. If we move the text-laden Transportation section up to just above the media section, and all that follows the media section are various lists, then a sense of "ending" to the main bulk of the article is appropriate. Anyway, good job on pruning this article! -- Oaxaca dan 19:16, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Your suggestion works for me! -- Alucard (Dr.) | Talk 19:18, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] McKinley Vocational High School

I have proposed that the stub article for McKinley Vocational High School be merged to this main article since it is a school that falls under the jurisdiction of Buffalo, New York. Not that there is any information in the article besides notable alumni. --Ozgod 00:46, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

That article has now been speedy deleted, as it was created by banned user Amorrow aka Pinktulip, while banned, and as nothing substantial had been added by anyone else. Musical L inguist 01:20, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Buffalo revitalization investigation

Hey everybody. I'm the student of Moscow State University (Department of foreign countries), Russia, and i'm on my graduation work at present. This sience work is dedicated to american cities revitalization and redevelopment. Also it is tightly connected with Buffalo. The main target is to learn the ways of revitalization in Buffalo, Oakland, Pittsburgh etc.

So, dear Buffalo citizens or someone who interests in it, could you please describe me the way of redevelopment in your city? The main point for me is to know all about measures that were made. When exactly did it begin? What were the steps to revitalize the city? Was the downtown take down and rebuild? Were the citizens settled apart? I'll appreciate very much for any detailed information.

Any kind of information would be very valuable for me! Thank you. Simon Freydlin Freydlins 18:48, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

P.S. Feel free to write me on this theme: boardpizza@mail.ru  And please forgive me for my poor english.

Other American cities that have experienced revival: Providence, Cleveland, Ohio, Chicago, Philadelphia, Detroit. Every city seems to have its own comeback story.--Loodog 21:05, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

That is the theme of my work. I'm trying to classify the revitalization methods using these samples (i've chosen Buffalo, Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Oakland and Cleveland). That's because i need detailed information. Thank you very much for answering. Freydlins 22:49, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

The only knowledge I have is of Providence's revitalization. The city's ocean cove had been filled in for development and railroad tracks, and what was left of the rivers had been paved over. Providence was racked with crime. The mayor Buddy Cianci secured $606 million of Community Development fund, including funds from other federal, state, and city sources, for investment in the downtown area and neighborhoods throughout the city. He marketed the city as a center for the arts. The rivers were uncovered and a cobblestone park surrounding them was created. A large mass of railroad tracks that had separated neighborhoods were run underground out of sight. Out of this came a skating rink, a new mall, and investment from nearby companies, which the city had given tax breaks to. For more information History_of_Providence#.22Renaissance.22--Loodog 01:07, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, Loodog. I'll include this to the work. Freydlins 01:20, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Continual Vandalism

For some reason, a specific paragraph has been constantly deleted over the last few days by a number of anon users. The repetition of the vandalism, and the specific focus on a single paragraph, suggests that it's one person. Perhaps we could put some kind of protection up to cut down on this?

The users deleting this paragraph are:

24.38.15.122 - appears to do most of the deletion
63.167.255.200
63.167.255.205

--Oaxaca dan 18:07, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I also noticed this, and have tried to get the user to come to this page to discuss whether there is a concrete reason for doing this. -- Alucard (Dr.) | Talk 18:57, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw your message. But he's/she's vandalized the page two or three times since you put that up. We need either a block on this person, or a protect against anons. -- Oaxaca dan 19:06, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I suggest you apply for a block to this person first, that should make them aware of how what they are doing is being perceived, if they haven't read their Talk page. -- Alucard (Dr.) | Talk 19:32, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I left a message on an Admin's page that had warned him/her. haven't heard anything yet. If you know somewhere else to report, please let me know - thanks -- Oaxaca dan 19:40, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

It worked. I usually use Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism and get very quick results. Cheers. -- Alucard (Dr.) | Talk 20:19, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

And a new one is back - I've had enough of this, and have requested a semi-protect over at WP:RFPP. Hope they approve -- Oaxaca dan 05:05, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

And it appears that we're back again, this time as User:Bufjam, doing the exact same thing.... -- Alucard (Dr.) | Talk 17:31, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Have warned the user and invited them to visit this page. -- Alucard (Dr.) | Talk 17:44, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Well he did it again after you warned him. How do we get this guy banned? T.C. 11:24, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Final warning added to user talk page as per WP guidelines. -- Alucard (Dr.) | Talk 13:13, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Bufjam did it once more and has now got an indefinite block on that account. We'll see what happens next... -- Alucard (Dr.) | Talk 16:27, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Alternative Lifestyle"

Is there existing policy on the phrase "alternative lifestyle" (under nightlife, while talking about the Allentown bars)? I found this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_lifestyle, stating that it is generally considered pejorative when referring to GLBT people (which, if I'm not mistaken, the bars in question are indeed the gay bars). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.75.218.4 (talk • contribs) 09:45, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't know of any particular policy or style guide that refers to this. Do you have a suggestion for better wording? -- Alucard (Dr.) | Talk 17:47, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Again, I'm assuming the bars in question are the gay and lesbian bars (I think one of them is generally more lesbian than gay male). So..."gay and lesbian bars"? Personally, I wouldn't mind "queer", but use of that word is still debated too. If there's some reason that "gay and lesbian" is inaccurate or insufficient for the places in question, I'd definitely be willing to listen to criticisms. I usually don't jump in on the editing end of wikipedia, but I seriously haven't heard that phrase used since the early 90s, and there's sort of a reason for that.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../b/u/f/Talk%7EBuffalo%2C_New_York_9490.html"

Categories: B-Class New York articles | High-importance New York articles | WikiProject Lakes | Unassessed Lakes articles | Unknown-importance Lakes articles