Talk:New Orleans, Louisiana
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
New discussion goes at the bottom of the page.
|
[edit] Anniversary
Selected on Template:March 21 selected anniversaries (may be in HTML comment)
[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject New Orleans
I started a WikiProject for everything New Orleans: Wikipedia:WikiProject New Orleans. Please join and contribute! Staroftheshow86 22:41, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Messed up Reference links
For some reason (I'm not entirely comfortable with the wiki syntax yet) but after footnote 11, it gets all html-y, I imagine from a missing " but I don't know exactly what it is. Mikelj 03:25, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
- fixed Mikelj 01:28, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] city motto?
it is surprising the city doesn't have a motto. Paris By Night 18:33, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
- Isn't it "Laissez les bons temps rouler!" ("Let the Good Times Roll") Not sure where that should go on the page or if it needs a source.--Justfred 15:25, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- I searched the city's Web site, to no avail. I've never been aware of any official motto. -- Muffuletta 15:37, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Survey on proposal to make U.S. city naming guidelines consistent with others countries
There is a survey in progress at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (settlements) to determine if there is consensus on a proposed change to the U.S. city naming conventions to be consistent with other countries, in particular Canada.
- This proposal would allow for this article to be located at New Orleans instead of New Orleans, Louisiana, bringing articles for American cities into line with articles for cities such as Paris and Toronto.--DaveOinSF 16:37, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
- However the proposal would allow U.S. cities to be inconsistent with the vast majority of other U.S. cities and towns, which (with a few exceptions) all use the "city, state" convention. -Will Beback 23:39, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Recent Article Changes
I've noticed an alarming amount of change in the New Orleans article lately, with an alarming lack of discussion to explain or even address it. Substantial portions have been deleted with little or no explination at all. Usually this is considered vandalism, and until it has been fully justified, I suggest we consider that possibility in this case.
Wbbigtymer 10:35, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Propose Lockdown on topic?
This article has become increasingly cluttered and hard to read. This is most likely due to the fact of New Orleans' publicity from hurricane Katrina and access to the internet, which would cause about 1.5 million New Orleans residents to each want to add something to the section.
I propose adding the following rules to the New Orleans aricle: Editing of this article by unregistered users is currently disabled. Such users may discuss changes, request unprotection, log in, or create an account.
I also propose all discussions of Katrina and Rita be moved to a new topic, or to the end of the article. They are out of place in between history and current facts. When they are history and the city is normal again, they can be removed and a much shorter version of the two Katrina sections of this article can be placed in the history.
New York City's New_york_city article should be a model for New Orleans' article, as it is much smoother to read. Megastealer 17:14, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Semiprotect?
There have been many junk edits by anon users, though I've seen a few legitimate anon contributions as well. Other opinions on semi-protecting this article for a while, to disallow edits by not logged in users? If there is consensus to do so, I can take care of it. Thoughts? -- Infrogmation 09:25, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
I strongly agree that we semiprotect this article. An unregistered user also claims anything I do to the article is incorrect and removes my changes. Coincidentally (not really), I'm only correcting grammar. Also, to fit the pictures closer to the text they correspond with, it is most useful to move some images to the left side. It makes the page read and flow better. Once again, someone keeps reverting my changes and I am not going to have an edit war with anyone.Megastealer 04:59, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Edit: IPs 24.215.140.225 and 81.63.140.37 need to be banned from editing wikipedia. -- Megastealer 16:41, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] West Florida
Am I wrong in recognizing that New Orleans was never a part of West Florida? It seems that I recall that the "Isle of Orleans" was maintained and traded as a separate entity from West Florida. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nolaham (talk • contribs) 06:39, 7 February 2007 (UTC).
[edit] Tribute City
Unless there is any serious objection, I think I'm going to delete this part of the Culture section. The Culture part is already really long, and there doesn't seem to be any important reason to keep this in the main New Orleans article. Staroftheshow86 21:39, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- Agree. A mention/link in "Culture of New Orleans" or "New Orleans in fiction" might be appropriate, but discussion is tangential to main article. -- 23:36, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Deleted. Staroftheshow86 14:51, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
- Deleted, again. Staroftheshow86 05:25, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Deleted. Staroftheshow86 14:51, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] No PD?
The NOPD is an enormous source of controversy in these post-Katrina days, and I'm surprised not only by the lack of an article for it on Wikipedia, but by the terseness of the single sentence devoted to it in the main NOLA article. I'd very much like to participate in creating a page, but it would be my first entry or editing in this noble and enormous project beyond the simplest of edits, and I don't trust myself to create such an important page on my own. If anyone relatively experienced in this is willing to work jointly with me in this, e-mail me(malenkylizards@gmail.com) and at least point me in the right direction. :) Thanks! Malenkylizards 21:52, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- I think that an entry for the NOPD should have its own separate wikipedia entry, maybe with a link to it in the "see also" section of this article. Megastealer 16:34, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Wikipedia is not anyone's personal soapbox to bash any particular public or private entity. So a section on dealing with 'controversy' of the NOPD is probably not acceptable here. There's already a good deal of well-written and well-sourced articles on Hurricane Katrina, so many of these concerns are probably already addressed there. In that group, there's also a sub-article on the Effect of Hurricane Katrina on New Orleans. [[Specific, well-sourced, non-Katrina-related issues might be placed in the Government section; but please keep from ranting. Dr. Cash 21:44, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Demographics Gobbledygook
The 'demographics' section should be re-worked using a chronological format, showing the historical population shifts of New Orleans over time, not a 'local boosterism' approach. Misunderstanding of census methodologies is not informative content. Sure 'sampling' misses households...it also ESTIMATES what is missed. So, sampling has little to do with numbers being undercounted. It is clear that New Orleans took a major hit in 2005, and the city is now more hispanic and less African than before the hurricane. Let's not forget, however, that the city already existed since 1718 and the 'demographics' section should reflect not just the last year but general trends over the last three centuries as well.→ R Young {yakłtalk} 15:10, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Good article status?
I removed the 'demoted GA' tag from the talk page. Looking at the article history, I noticed that ScienceApologist added the GA tag on Jan 27, 2006. For some weird reason, it was removed the following day by an anonymous IP editor (69.192.9.65). Given the current cleanup tags on the article, I just think it's best to remove the tag and we'll nominate for GA status when the article is decent. Dr. Cash 18:05, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Education
At the same time, the apparent low quality of public schools in New Orleans has encouraged middle class families to educate their children in private or parochial schools. This has contributed to major underfunding of the public school system.
This is blatantly PoV and I recommend that it be deleted. It asserts without evidence that the public school system is "underfunded," as opposed to "plagued by rampant fraud and graft." Rather than hold the argument on the main page or weasel-word through this dispute, or even attempt to prove it one way or the other anywhere, I recommend that those two sentences just be deleted. --Gordongekko909 01:28, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Categories: WikiProject Louisiana articles | New Orleans articles needing attention | B-Class New Orleans articles | Top-importance New Orleans articles | WikiProject New Orleans articles | B-Class WikiProject Cities articles | High-importance WikiProject Cities articles | Wikipedia featured article candidates (contested) | Cleanup from May 2006 | All pages needing cleanup | Wikipedia featured articles in other languages (Esperanto) | Spoken Wikipedia requests