Talk:Gellerup

message: Very deficient article
This article is framing Gellerup solely as an area of 'crime and migration'. Even in the (in my view) useless section about traffic, the article is concerned about assaults in busses and so on. I do not argue that the there's a reason for the Gellerup-image but I believe it is not adequately sourced nor sufficiently regarding a more reflective image about areas. I assume it meets not the standards of Wikipedia. (Why does it list all bus lines anyways???) :) 
--130.225.247.81 (talk) 14:09, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

message: I don't see "Gellerup Planen" on the Danish Wikipedia page; I see :da:Gellerupparken (it has a page of its own), and that's also in the first picture caption (and in white letters on the side of the building depicted there). I suspect "Gellerup plan" may refer to the plan that led to the construction of the development, but perhaps there has been a change of name? Yngvadottir (talk) 15:22, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Housing project name 

message: exerpt from "Balance" (see below) about the name. Yngvadottir wrote: 
It should not seek to make a point about what the place should be called unless that's what the good sources say (over time, neighbourhoods often change name or are thought of as having different boundaries.
Answer
Well it is in fact in interesting discussion you have raised and something that applies to a lot of other subjects on WP. It could indeed be a problem if WP started adopting everyday language as the truth. And that holds true with names as well. If something have an official name, then WP should indeed reflect that as a first priority. When that is done WP can always mention that in everyday conversations it is commonly called ***. there is many many reasons for this approach, and it is not my personal invention to tackle naming this way - it is the objective and scientific way of doing it. Let my list a few of the many reasons why it will soon end in a mess, if a media like WP starts adopting everyday language and naming. It will happen because ...
* everyday language changes and sometimes rapidly
* everyday language is indeed something that can be influenced by certain factions of society to serve their personal needs and promotional urges.
* because WP will loose its status as objective and encyclopedic. 
* because people look to WP to see what is really the truth and not just everyday habits.
A good example is anatomy. WP should indeed inform that the jaw bone is called the mandible. Right? Can you see my point.
As I have written three times now in different posts, I originally included a few lines explaining how places in the area was named in everyday language (and the media) and elaborated on the confusion it could cause. But it got deleted (I think it was Drmies). You are welcome to write a few new lines about it, I think it would indeed clarify a few misunderstandings. You have all my blessing! :-)
RhinoMind (talk) 20:37, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  more on names and objectivity 

message: I am thinking about linking this page to the subjects of 
* ghetto and 'vulnerable residential areas'
* Housing cooperatives in the Nordic Countries.
I dont know if such subjects exist currently or how to link, as I am new as WP-contributor. I just thought I would like to express how I see this page. 
The Gellerup Plan is in the real world and in many ways, a node that connects a lot of issues and subjects of international importance on a global scale. Now I have started that journey, by providing a more realistic view and more elaborate and detailed info. Take part if you like dear reader! And let it be constructive :-)
RhinoMind  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.52.84.40 (talk) 18:59, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linking to Categories 

message: As said Gellerup is an important an interesting node for many reasons. To exemplify that I have ideas about starting articles on the following subjects:
* Aarhus V rap
* famous people from Gelleup (especially the Gellerup Plan)
* more about the history and original visions behind The Gellerup Plan.
* more about the social, ethnic, political and religeos issues.
* life in the Gellerup Plan
* upload of more interesting and descriptive photos to wikicommons.
If you (anyone reading) feel inspired, just go ahead! I will try to catch up later :-)  
RhinoMind...just sharing 
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.52.84.40 (talk) 19:13, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  New articles linking to Gellerup 

message: I had added a section on Social Activities, but everything got deleted. I believe it was wrong.
When writing an article of an "especially vulnerable residential area" (ghetto) like this area, I feel it is important to infom that there are many public supported social activities going on. Why? Because the lack of social and leisure activities for especially young people, is recognized as a huge problem in many ghettos, and the act of introducing them as an important vehicle for progress. The fact that Gellerup have a lot of social activities makes it something special.
I had linked to many examples, but the whole section got deleted by Drmies. As I understands it, the reason was that the text claimed, that some of the activities were popular and the links did not document they were? Anyway, I feel the links should be mentioned as just examples of the social activities going on, and then just omit the claim that they are popular. Wouldn't that solve the problem, without deleting the whole section Drmies? 
RhinoMind  — Preceding unsigned comment added by RhinoMind (talk • contribs) 19:43, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Social activities section 

message: More information, such as notable people from Gellerup, and of course more pics, are always good. But the key to many of the issues, such as the social activities and whether it's generally thought of as the most dangerous area in Denmark, and also including the status of the Gellerup Planen name, is what the balance of information in the sources is. The article should not seek to present any thesis about what underprivileged settlements need ... unless Gellerup has been used prominently as an example in such arguments, and the article should then say just that. It should not seek to make a point about what the place should be called unless that's what the good sources say (over time, neighbourhoods often change name or are thought of as having different boundaries. (Red Hook, Brooklyn and South Brooklyn make an interesting comparison.) Things like the housing associations can either be a separate article or a clause or sentence of explanation (I think the latter works better, since there are similar things in many countries). But one of the beauties of an online encyclopaedia is that the reader can just click through to find relevant background in a linked article. The job of this article is to summarise what reliable sources have said about Gellerup. So yes, if it's been frequently presented as a particularly crime-ridden area, that should be said, with one or more citations, although statistics may not be necessary. The plan and use of modern high-rise architecture has clearly been much discussed - that needs to be said and cited. But if it's just mentioned, that source doesn't need to be used; and Wikipedia cannot be a complete directory of information (bus timetables, lists of classes, phone numbers ... ) and better serves the reader in any case by providing one or two external links that will eventually lead to such information in its most up-to-date form. So the question is really, has anyone written in either the press or an academic article about, for example, the leisure-time offerings in Gellerup as related to helping disadvantaged residents? If yes, a summary of what they wrote is good to include. If no, then it belongs in other, more general articles, or in articles about the housing complexes or neighbourhoods that were used as the main examples. It doesn't all have to be in this article and shouldn't be. (You can maybe tell I haven't yet had time to examine the points made in the expansion and the sources cited. Sorry to be so general in the meantime, but maybe others have more time and can help us get specific and use the material to make a tighter but more developed article.) Yngvadottir (talk) 15:12, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Balance

message: Exerpt from "Balance" about crime. Yngvadottir wrote: 
So yes, if it's been frequently presented as a particularly crime-ridden area, that should be said, with one or more citations, although statistics may not be necessary. 
Answer
Anyway. Yes as I have explained in a post above in another discussion, yes the Gellerup Plan is indeed crime-riddin. But as you say, there are many claims and equally many are badly referenced. I have (again...:-) written a bit more about the crime and I believe I have more reliable references, but it got deleted. I might write more on that issue to get more balance, as you also calls for. But not now. Some source even claims, that right now the crimerate is on level with the rest of Aarhus, but again it is un-sourced info. Right now the English version on the subject is way better than the Danish one. I suspect it is because of the very very very (!!!) heated debate in Aarhus and Denmark about this place (I cannot emphasize enough how heated that debate is at times). And that have maybe made the Danish WP a battle-ground for radicals, erasing and changing the contents all the time. Can you see my point? But anyway I am just guessing. Ok enough of this. Gellerup Plan is a wild place and stuff happens everyday. Another incident I havent mentioned is greenlanders beeing stoned and kicked out of Gellerupparken by somali and arab groups. The municipality had to re-house them. It happened probably because Greenlanders like alcohol, and muslims hate alcohol. No one got sentenced, because no one dared to initiate a court case and they couldnt identify anyone anyway. So this is a story, that is very hard to document, see? There are numerous cases like this. 
As you, I think the cases that are up now, is adequately documented and an ok example. We dont need to bring exhaustive lists. Thats not within WP guidelines.
RhinoMind (talk) 20:57, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  About crime 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Gellerup. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131227094828/http://brabrand-boligforening.dk/Gellerupparken.aspx?ID=1440 to http://brabrand-boligforening.dk/Gellerupparken.aspx?ID=1440
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131227092550/http://brabrand-boligforening.dk/Tovesh%C3%B8j.aspx?ID=1446 to http://brabrand-boligforening.dk/Tovesh%C3%B8j.aspx?ID=1446
*Added  tag to http://www.bbbo.dk/Files/Filer/Materiale/historien.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130902094326/http://www.aarhusportalen.dk:80/mosk_og_islamisk_kulturcenter.asp to http://www.aarhusportalen.dk/mosk_og_islamisk_kulturcenter.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140322001708/http://mbbl.dk/publikationer/liste-over-saerligt-udsatte-boligomraader-pr-1-februar-2014 to http://mbbl.dk/publikationer/liste-over-saerligt-udsatte-boligomraader-pr-1-februar-2014
*Added  tag to http://www.cfbu.dk/projekter/cfbus-undersoegelser/beredskabet-i-gellerup/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160717070451/http://www.aarhusportalen.dk/default.asp?Id=418 to http://www.aarhusportalen.dk/default.asp?Id=418&AjrDcmntId=19471
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:02, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Gellerup. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://archive.is/20130720004906/http://www.gellerup.nu/aktuelt/nyheder/arkiv/dato/2011/juni/04/unge-skal-ud-af-gellerup/ to http://www.gellerup.nu/aktuelt/nyheder/arkiv/dato/2011/juni/04/unge-skal-ud-af-gellerup/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:35, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Gellerup. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://mosquedenmark.org/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304083701/http://aarhus.enhedslisten.dk/node/3530 to http://aarhus.enhedslisten.dk/node/3530
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:17, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hi. There have been some new editing of the "Places of worship" section recently, adding new info and more details on the Grimhøj mosque and all the controversies the people around this place has been involved in. All these issues are interesting, notable and several of them very important, even on an national level, some on an international level even. But... I don't think it is fair that the religious issues takes up so much space in this article about the whole neighbourhood of Gellerup. How can we solve this imbalance? 
Can we elaborate on the religious issues in another article perhaps? I don't want to give the impression that this particular info should be suppressed, I am all about balance in relation to the overall subject which is the Gellerup neighbourhood and not religious issues. RhinoMind (talk) 11:19, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Islamic and religious issues