Talk:St. George, Utah
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Pictures of Downtown
I recently added a photo of Downtown Saint George to the website (in the infobox), but I would really rather have a new, updated photo that better depicts Downtown as it is today. If somebody could find something like that, it would be greatly appreciated VBlack 18:46, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- There already was a new picture of downtown today on there. You moved it. MojaveNC 05:55, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Deletion of Website
The website http://www.untraveledroad.com/USA/Utah/Washington/StGeorge.htm was recently deleted as "Spam". I, having grown up in St. George, personally feel that it is a relevant and interesting website on which a person can see a few areas of interest in St. Georg and think that it should be added again. What does everyone else think. --Nate 02:50, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
- I agree with you; the person who deleted it deleted it from all of the Utah pages that had it, though, and I don't want to take the time to add them all back. I don't know why he thought it was spam. bob rulz 02:53, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
- Hi, I believe I'm the one that deleted the links. They were in violation of WP:EL - in particular this clause that states that a site should not be linked to if "A website that you own or maintain, even if the guidelines above imply that it should be linked to. This is because of neutrality and point-of-view concerns; neutrality is an important objective at Wikipedia, and a difficult one. If it is relevant and informative, mention it on the talk page and let other — neutral — Wikipedia editors decide whether to add the link.". The owner of untraveled road linked more than 100 articles to his site. In his dialog with me he is clear that the primary reason is to drive traffic and create revenue - to support the site, which is a nice site. My main concern is not the spam, it's the fact that he, the owner of the site, did the massive linking. If anyone things the site is a valuable addition to an article then I see no problem with adding the links back. Also, the untraveled road site owner, who initially created all the links, called me a vigilante after I deleted them, but in fact, I only deleted the links after a discussion on the talk page of the wikipedia spam project. Brian 03:21, 21 August 2006 (UTC)btball
- Ah, I didn't realize that the owner of the website was the one who added the links in. I personally think they're cool and informative, if it's the website I think it is (I just tried the link and it didn't work). bob rulz 03:36, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the input! I like the site, but I'll let other people decide if it should be re-added. --Nate 17:00, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
- Ah, I didn't realize that the owner of the website was the one who added the links in. I personally think they're cool and informative, if it's the website I think it is (I just tried the link and it didn't work). bob rulz 03:36, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
- Hi, I believe I'm the one that deleted the links. They were in violation of WP:EL - in particular this clause that states that a site should not be linked to if "A website that you own or maintain, even if the guidelines above imply that it should be linked to. This is because of neutrality and point-of-view concerns; neutrality is an important objective at Wikipedia, and a difficult one. If it is relevant and informative, mention it on the talk page and let other — neutral — Wikipedia editors decide whether to add the link.". The owner of untraveled road linked more than 100 articles to his site. In his dialog with me he is clear that the primary reason is to drive traffic and create revenue - to support the site, which is a nice site. My main concern is not the spam, it's the fact that he, the owner of the site, did the massive linking. If anyone things the site is a valuable addition to an article then I see no problem with adding the links back. Also, the untraveled road site owner, who initially created all the links, called me a vigilante after I deleted them, but in fact, I only deleted the links after a discussion on the talk page of the wikipedia spam project. Brian 03:21, 21 August 2006 (UTC)btball
[edit] St. George was 2nd fastest growing Metro area as of 9/05
According to documents published by the U.S. Census Bureau dated September 2005 the fastest growing Metro Area in the country was Greeley, CO. Las Vegas, NV was 3rd and St. George, UT was 2nd.
- Can you back that up with a reference? Jaxad0127 19:35, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- I'll look into it, but I remember reading in the newspaper that it was the second-fastest growing. The newspaper can get its facts wrong, though. bob rulz 00:10, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Here's the website of the official release from the cenus bureau [1] --Nate 19:50, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Update Please
This article needs to be updated.
- How so? bob rulz 23:32, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Bloomington
As I recall St. George annexed Bloomington. Is this true? Would someone like to create a re-direct from Bloomington to St. George/add a Bloomington section?--71.213.74.70 19:15, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
- Bloomington has been within the St. George city limits for as long as I can remember. MojaveNC 05:56, 1 February 2007 (UTC)