Talk:Houston/Archive 1

message: Since I don't know any French, the French version of this page is bare bones.
Someone please flesh out that article.
I would also like to see a Japanese version of this page. Sigh, I only know English and some Spanish. WhisperToMe 05:51, 20 Sep 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Translation

message: Are the lists of radio and TV stations really necessary??
-chayves4u
Yes, Chayves. Its done in Toronto, and so, it is done here. WhisperToMe 22:16, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lists of radio and TV stations 

message: You say that Houston is the "Fastest Growing City In America" but you never say why it is. Or why it is starting to increase now. I would like to know WHY!?
People have said this since the early 1980s.  Houston is no longer the fastest growing city, which is now probably Las Vegas or Phoenix.
--According to the Information Please Almanac (which Time magazine uses for its own almanac), Houston was not even among the top ten fastest growing cities OR Metropolitan areas for the U.S. between 1990 and 2000. The statements should simply be removed. --Jleon 18:35, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fastest growing city 

message: User:4.226.213.140 removed the paragraph about Houston being the US's fattest city, saying "Removed the fattest city status and regarding how many awards we received. This is NOT something to brag about!"  It not being something to brag about doesn't mean it shouldn't be in the article; things that are negative about the subject of an article are still appropriate content. AJR 10:59, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fattest city 

message: Re:"Houstonians often consider themselves more "down to earth" than their neighbors five hours to the north."
I realise I'm being really picky here, but technically, Dallas is not five hours north of Houston.  An hour is a unit of time, not distance. It is colloquial in Houston and in other places where the automobile is a dominant part of life to refer to distance in driving time, but in the context of an encyclopedia, it is, to my thinking, inappropriate. After all, if one flies to Dallas (which many people do), it's only an hour away. In this case, I think leaving out "five hours" is most appropriate. Thank you and I promise I'll get a life now. Rockhopper10r 04:33, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: "Five Hours to the North"

message: "4.226.213.126 (Made picture to 290px again and stop reverting my edits unless you discuss on talk page to why you should get your way. The 290px works fine on an 800x600 pixel monitor configuration)"
Not everyone has that monitor size. Enough said. WhisperToMe 06:34, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image size 

message: This was the most cluttered article I have ever encountered and it was getting worse! I was then motivated by a comment made by Chayves4u above in early 2004 and spent a few hours with 20 edits or so revising, adding information, reformating, and moving the most of the "lists of..." to its own article outside of the main article. As a result, the Houston, Texas article is now uncluttered! I dedicate this major revision to Chayves4u, thank you for motivating me. I agree with him that the list of radio and television stations and other lists of that nature are a waste of space and they clutter up the article.
The new revision did not lose anything, all of the "lists of..." are now linked under their specific section in the main article. For example, the List of Television Station is now linked under the "Media and entertainment" section of the article. I hope you guys like what I did because I spent a lot of time on it and I think it is for the best. 
 UH Collegian 13:55, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major revision and formating of article 

message: Re:UH's 25th anniversary: That in and of itself really isn't an historical event. The fiftieth anniversary ties in with the founding of the UH System, so that works.Rockhopper10r 19:20, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Anniversaries

message: Can someone please replace the image for the area coverage of the Houston Metropolitan Area. I do not know how to do it nor do I know where to get the image. As of 2003, the metropolitan area covers 10 counties instead of the map showing only eight counties. Any help is appreciated! UH Collegian 08:30, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Map Request 

message: The following POV problems need to be addressed in the section on highways:
1. Introductory sentence takes the POV's that Houston's development (described as "sprawl") is a bad thing and implies that Houston's lack of zoning is bad by blaming it for so-called "sprawl." This is a political opinion as not all consider urban growth to be "sprawl" and whether or not zoning's absence is its cause is highly debatable (Washington, D.C. and its suburbs for example are heavily zoned yet there is "sprawl" of city commuters etc. deep into Maryland, Virginia, and even West Virginia now!)
2. Attributing Houston's air problems to cars in and of themselves and attributing the ozone problem to them is a POV assertion. Most of Houston's air pollution actually comes from the gulf coast refineries and chemical plants. Furthermore the pollution that is caused by cars is not so much a result of "car dependence" as the article currently asserts but rather due to congestion on certain freeways that causes cars to unnecessarily idle for longer periods while waiting on traffic. This has been shown in studies for several years by Texas A&M's transportation center.
3. The assertion that "frontage roads make freeway access very easy, but not very pretty" is POV. I could just as easily say "sound walls are not very pretty" as sound walls are very common in places without frontage roads. Also, frontage roads are not inherently "unusual." Houston has a lot of them but other cities - especially in Texas and especially younger cities - also have them.
4. The current version says that frontage roads are the reason Houston has attracted gas stations. Is there any reliable source or study showing this? Every major city has gas stations whether they are located on the frontage road or simply on the off ramp where there's no frontage road.
Please address these issues to make the highway section more NPOV, then the tag can be removed. Rangerdude 03:47, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I attempted to edit some of the most biased sentences.  I know it hasn't totally resolved the POV problem with this section but hopefully it is a start?  I'm new to this so perhaps someone with more experience can do better.  I didn't make any major changes to the section - just reworded sentences and tried to show both sides of the key issues.  I hope this was okay?  Salty Kid  talk 23:44, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well scratch that, someone reverted the page to a previous edit.  I wonder if they plan to address these issues or should we try again?  Salty Kid |  talk 01:12, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: POV Problems in Highways section

message: There seems to be something of a personal dispute between a couple of IP users.  Please, when reverting the article, consider what changes unrelated to your dispute have been made in other sections.  Salty Kid |  talk 07:02, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use Care When Reverting Please