Talk:Parma, Ohio/Archive 1

message: Hey, does anyone have a list of Parma's mayors that can be added to the Wikipedia article on Parma?
I have a complete list of Parma's mayors that should be available in a few days. -- Mycroft.Holmes 13:25, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this would make a good addition.--24.154.173.243 15:23, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: List of Mayors

message: Frank D. Johnson1928 – 1933
Anthony A. Fleger1934 - 1935
Roland E. Reichert1936 - 1942
Sylvester Augustine1942 - 1945
Roland E. Reichert1946 - 1949
Lawrence Stary1950 – 1951
Stephen A. Zona1952 - 1957
Joseph W. Kadar1958 – 1959
Sylvester Augustine1960 – 1961
John Bobko1961
James W. Day1962 – 1967
John Petruska1967 – 1987
Michael A. Ries1988 – 1994
Gerald M. Boldt1994 – 2003
Dean DePiero2004 – present
I added the information in an HTML table. It should be placed in a wiki-table.--Mycroft.Holmes 18:12, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you able to add this to the main article?  Do you have a reference for this information?  I'd rather see stuf like this added than the deletion campaign by a minority.  Best, --24.154.173.243 20:44, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: List of Mayors from 1928 to present

message: Please add this template "Mapit-US-cityscale|41.391852|-81.728502" to external links. -- Mycroft.Holmes 00:46, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Here's what should happen after unlocking, at least what's acceptable to myself and the majority of contributors to this article:
1) Restore economy section to include paragraphs on pet and video stores, but NOT the rant on cats, although really the comment on cats didn't bother me any.
2) Add Mycroft's full list of mayors.
3) While I have no problem with it, I think that most of us will not be miffed if the current paragraph on the Current Status and Future Outlook is removed.
This is as fair and reasonable of a compromise as you'll ever see! --140.254.69.123 15:54, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: 2 and 3 sound good, but I still have a problem with the bias in the economy section. I've looked arond at many other city articles and almost none of them have this kind of npov in it, adn the ones that do mention that the company was founded there, or something to that extent. The article itself is not bad, but by providing examples it causes problems. --Wizardman 16:50, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Regardng the econmy section: The pet store stuff is just not necessary. It's a blatant attempt at obtaining a good google return. You can say it's not but, as a famous Clevelander used to say: You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time, but you can't fool Mom. The video store stuff describes an issue not unique to Parma, but common to the US economy in general. I'm not sure what to say about the cat-rant other than to say what you're supposed to say when you have nothing nice to say. The Current Status / Future Outlook is an opinion (at best) and not at all encyclopedic in nature. It should be removed. The list of mayors is solid, verifyable, historical data and should be added ASAP.--Mycroft.Holmes 19:03, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The economy section has been revised well-enough to make it worthy to stay, minus the cat rant.  The future outlook is somewhat opinion, although there is a lot of truth to the reality that Parma has really hit some snags and there is indeed widespread disappointment in DePiero (too bad his opposition was the unpopular Lime!).  The mayor section is fine.  So, add the full list of mayors, restore some of the most recently revised economic stuff, and delete the future outlook section.  That all seems fine by me.  Mycroft seems to just have something out for the one pet store or something and to put a new spin on your own little quote, you're not fooling me on that one!  Good job on the mayor list, at least. --164.107.92.120 20:57, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Never heard of the joint until I read this article. --Mycroft.Holmes 21:14, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Then you must not really be all that familiar with Parma and Cuyahoga county. --164.107.92.120 00:30, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I lived in Parma for over 18 years, and yet have never heard of RMS Aquaculture or Parma Pets. Petsmart is a national chain so there is no need for that either. Never heard of Coreno or Video theatre either. (I was a longtime customer of Mr. Z though, even after the Cone Zone fire). Again the cat rant is pointless. The point is not whether I've heard of these, the point is do they strongly help or hurt the article. If you're going to add that, then why add stuff about all the pizza shops or the 3 ice cream shops on State Road? I don't add that stuff (even though Parma's way up there in pizza shops per capita) because it's not useful. In fact the stat I just put down is more useful than the bias that anon IP 172. (which I think is a Parma High computer) --Wizardman 00:47, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think Wizardman uses a Greenbriar Junior High computer . . .  All the evidence points in that direction! Lol! :) --164.107.208.34 20:08, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

text: How could you have not heard of Parma Pets at least?!  It's been in the city for decades! As for RMS, there was one store by ParmaTown, then one on Broadview, not to mention stores in Strongsville, Middleburg Heights, Willoughby, on online store, etc.  Not exactly small potatoes, although certainly not as widespread as PetSmart.  Maybe it is worth noting that Parma has an abundance of pizza joints and multiple ice cream places on State Road. --164.107.92.120 04:41, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

text: My bona fides: I lived on Snow Road as a child in the early sixties and went to John Muir ES until 2nd grade. I grew up in various spots around the West Side. I graduated HS on far West Side in the late seveties and went to college near Cincinnati until moving away  in the very early eighties. --Mycroft.Holmes 14:06, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, no wonder.  The two RMS stores came to Parma post 1985. I went to John Muir as well years back.  Anyway, you should see it now.  After the small fire destroyed a whole class room the school has undertaken some substantial physical expansion and improvements.  The last time I drove past it, it looked nothing like it did in the late 1980s.  Padua has also changed significantly in the recent past.  Also, since you left, they tore down the old police station and built some huge new justice center.  Cheers, --164.107.208.34 20:08, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was attending John Muir when the fire happened.  We barely got any school off!  Fortunately, as far I as I can remember, no one was injured or killed.  Perhaps the biggest fire I recall happening in Parma was around Pearl and Ridge, where some beauty school was destroyed.  And yes, I too feel that the pet store and video store information should remain, if not be expanded.  Parma used to have lots of small pet stores and video stores, but these have indeed mostly given way to the chains (most of which I like, especially PetSmart and RMS, although I've shopped at Parma Pets as well).  Parma has multiple ice cream places on State Road (Honey Hut, Doc's Shake Shoppe, Super Cream, Zero Zest, etc.), and lots of pizza places.  Parma also has a good deal of churches, too.  While the pet and video stores have largely changed, there are still plenty of non-chain pizza stores (Leonardo's, Napoleon's, etc.), as well as ice cream places.  And yes, both John Muir and Padua are/have undertaking/en significant renovations.  I'm not sure whatever happened to the old police station.  Also, is it worth having a council president list as well?  We've had some rather notorious council presidents with Ken K. making national news, but the current guy, Germana, also being rather routinely criticized in the press? Regards, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles 21:56, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: After Unlocking

message: I spent many a Saturday afternoon watching Super Host on Channel 43. Thinking of Supe reminded me that WUAB was based in Parma for awhile. However, after reading the wiki entry, it appears that WUAB cleared out quite some time ago. Dunno if this is worth a mention or not. -- Mycroft.Holmes 01:04, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Channel 43

message: Found these guys on IMDB.COM
Mike Mizanin (wrassler)
Date of birth (location): ... 8 October 1980, Parma, Ohio, USA ...
I think this guy has his own website and wiki entry.
: Wasn't he a finalist on WWE's Tuff Enough?  I heard he was on some other reality TV show as well.--64.12.116.131 02:00, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Famous Parmans

message: Any chance Ghoulardi deserves a mention here? He's the main reason many people have ever heard of Parma, Ohio. - Jmabel | Talk 18:07, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree! See the "Parma Jokes" section above. -- Mycroft.Holmes 19:09, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ghoulardi 

message: After having lived away from Cleveland for many years, the original theme song of Drew Carey's TV show brought back lots of memories. Again, not sure if Drew, the show, and the song deserve a mention, but I think they do. -- Mycroft.Holmes 02:01, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Moon Over Parma

message: The fact that Mom & Pop businesses are dying in order to make way for larger companies is not unique to Parma. People have been complaining about Wal-Mart (especially in the rural South) since the 80's In fact, this is not even a problen unique to our time. In the 30's and 40's, supermarkets like A & P were considered the scourge of the local grocer and an evil that had to be stopped. I'm sure with a little constructive Googling, even earlier examples could be found.
Regarding the pet store "war": pet stores are not unique to Parma. As far as I have been able to determine, it's a backhanded attempt to get Google link. When "RMS Aquaculture" was in the article, a Google for "Aquaculture" showed the Wikiwpedia article first. That's a Wiki-no-no I'd wager.
Added to all this is the fact that the the "person" who keeps adding the questionable material has remained steadfastly annonymous. In addition, that same person uses threats of permanent bannage to threaten other editors. My general rule of thumb is that questionable material added by an annoymous user is subject to summary deletion. I don't thnk that's a bad or an unfair guideline. I'll usually try to to a little reasearch to check out the addition, but if I don't have time and it smells a little funny, into the garbage it goes! 
To any sysops who might watching,  I would respectfully request the this page be changed from protected to semi-protected status. If you look at the history of this page, you'll see that the article was extremely quiet while it was semi-protected. When the page is open, Annony will usually telegraph a new outbreak of hostilities by vandalizing my user page just to see if I'm watching. 
I believe if you check my other edits, you'll find that that they are factual, well-written, and completely "under control". -- Mycroft.Holmes 13:20, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wholeheartedly disagree.  I know for a fact that a good deal of what you delete on the Parma page is NOT from the same person. Moreover, as for the pet store comments they do preference any specific store.  There are no "shop here" style comments; in fact, multiple stores are mentioned in passing.  Even if the trend is not unique to Parma, it fits with a larger theme of the article in that Parma has changed noticeable over the past few decades:
1. Parma Heights broke off of a Parma (supposedly for religious reasons)
2. Parma's population went from over 100,000 to now being in the low 80,000s
3. Parma's police force had over 100 officers, but now has around 80 (paralleling the population trend); Parma's police force has also cancelled DARE and never replaced its K9 unit
4. Parma's visual make up in the way of smaller stores has given way to the chains
Anyway, a lot of us anonymous users who are hesitant to register because of identity theft fears, personal attacks, etc., still make worthwhile contributions.  I usually look for grammar errors or typos in articles and I care about Parma because I lived there for nearly 15 years.  So, I think protecting the page is pointless and that the economic information is 100% acceptable and reasonable.  Best, --24.154.173.243 15:30, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: General Response to Annony and Request for Article Semi-Protection

message: When I was growing up in Cleveland, Parma was the butt of a number of jokes. I'm not sure how sensibilities are in this ultra-sensitive time, but I think a mention of the jokes (e.g. White Socks and Pink Flamingos) and jokesters (e.g. Ghoulardi, The Ghoul, Houlihan & Big Chuck) are worth a mention. I was never offended by them during my time in Parma and the West Side, but that was a loooooooong time ago. If these are now considered outre by Parmans and Clevelanders, we can leave it out. -- Mycroft.Holmes 01:34, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I moved this item to the section on suspected Parma racism as it seems to fit better there and flow into the existing point better.  Cheers, --172.147.53.196 23:18, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Parma jokes = racism? Puh-leeze! I created a section called "References in Popular Culture" and moved the jokes there. -- Mycroft.Holmes 11:10, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: First off, I'm okay with the change, but since when can ethnic jokes NOT equal a form of racism?!  Puh-leeze!!  Plus, truth be told, poking fun at Parma does to some extent fit with its negative image and ties into its war with the NAACP. --172.134.152.199 13:05, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sigh. I'm sorry to disagree, but jokes about white socks, chrome balls and pink flamingoes just doesn't set off my racism alarm! -- Mycroft.Holmes 14:15, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  ROO ROO ROO, it sets off mine and fits with the racist stereotype of Parma being a patchwork of only European ethncities. --164.107.208.43 16:55, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

text: That's perfect. Well done. swain 14:48, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Parma Jokes

message: As I see there's been some discussion about removing the text pertaining to the "Witch Hunt," I thought I would point out, to those who do not know, that an article has been created on The Parma Witch Hunt. I first got involved with the article because it was a blatant copyvio from another site, and then I learned that its entire text (following the out-of-process removal of the copyrighted text) was copied verbatum from a section of this article, namely from the portion of the history section on the "Witch Hunt." The text is extremely biased, and seems to me to be nothing more than an attack page. The chief author (an anon on a dynamic IP who is next to impossible to contact) has provided an, in my opinion, incredulous reason for the article's existence: "The point is to have a basis for an article that can be expanded later, so as not to have too much information on the regular Parma page." Now, I personally believe the article to be a POV fork, especially given that the text is disputed here, but before bringing the issue to AfD I would like some input from the contributors to this article as to whether The Parma Witch Hunt is a real, notable, verifiable event (I cannot find a singe hit on Google), and as to whether having this as an independent page could potentially lead to a comprehensive, unbiased account of the event. Otherwise, I think the article should be deleted, regardless of whether or not it infringes upon any copyrights. AmiDaniel (talk) 19:26, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The text is not biased at all and is 100% accurate.  Only a Witch Hunter would actually claim bias there . . . And I don't think it's meant as an attack at all, but just an attempt to summarize one of the darkest chapter's in Parma's history.  I think the best solution would be for a more skilled writer to incorporate the many facts on this talk page that cite newspaper articles and the like into this section.  The Witch Hunt is just one name for the event, others have called it the Blue Scare, but some have even spotted cars in Parma with Parma Witch Hunt bumper stickers!  Personally, I think that the best solution could be for the current information to remain on the Parma page and that maybe the separate article isn't necessary.  A small paragraph like we have on the city's history is fine by me.--205.188.116.13 22:44, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I cleaned it all up and added the various references and links found here and on the web.  Debate should be over now.  :) --64.12.116.131 23:20, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Since the chief contributor conceded that the article was a fork and thus should simply be merged back into the current article, I've converted it into a redirect. I've also added back the  tags to the section in question as it's quite clear there are still questions being raised about both the neutrality and the factuality of the section not only by me, but also by WizardMan and Chromix. I don't live in Parma and have not heard of the "Witch Hunt," and running a google search returns, as I said, 0 hits. The only sources cited seem quite unreliable, and it seems to me that unless it can be shown that the Witch Hunt received national press, it should be removed altogether. AmiDaniel (talk) 23:05, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It did make the internet rounds, especially on forums like at parma-oh.com and policecrimes.com, but much of these discussions were deleted after very personal information on police officers and reporters started to appear including medical information, home addresses, etc.  Ugly situation all around.  The current wording is pretty unbiased and accurate.--172.129.174.175 02:14, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I fail to see how the wording is unbiased and accurate in the least. I have never heard of this, and I'm sure that if I were to ask said police officers about this, I'd hear a different story (maybe I should try that). Besides, the Parma police aren't exactly model citizens as this article attempts to make them. Just stop removing the tag. --Wizardman 04:21, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Because you are personally ignorant of something doesn't mean it didn't happen or has no impact on its accuracy.  There's probably species of insects that I've never heard of, but I won't go to the Wiki article on them and put up disputed tags just because "I have never heard of this."  Seriously, that's just ridiculous.  The article does not suggest that ALL police are without sins, only that the particular allegations that were made by the politicians all over The Plain Dealer, Sun Post, TV news, etc. were later proven to be false. If you're really from Parma and you never heard of the Witch Hunt, then I simply can't take you seriously.  It was the top lead article on the front page of the Plain Dealer for several days in a row, even with a war going on in Iraq! --172.163.75.164 13:21, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I'll second that. It is very bad etiquette to remove tags placed by others. Once you believe you have cleaned up the text, please post here and ask that I, WizardMan, or someone else who does not share your view remove the tags. Obviously, the text is still disputed, which is what the tag says. While you personally feel the text is unbiased, you cannot claim that the text is not currently disputed. AmiDaniel (talk) 06:57, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As WizardMan claims no knowledge of the issue, I don't think such contributors are really in a fair position to dispute it.  Now if someone had additional facts to include, that be one thing, but a dispute from someone who doesn't know what they're talking about is invalid.  Let those who are actually familiar with the issue edit the material.  The text has been cleaned up greatly already from its original form and has been supplemented with various links and references to official reports and newspapers articles. Seriously now, this has to be one of the more sourced sections of anything I've seen on Wikipedia and just can't see how anyone can continue to dispute it, unless they have different motives . . .--172.163.75.164 13:21, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, you don't know anything about nannochoristidae. You read the article on them. It says, "Nannochoristidae are the best bugs ever, although the good-old-boys will tell you otherwise. If you disagree that nannochristidae are not the best then you must be a part of the anti-nannochoristidae cabal." Are you not allowed to tag that section as POV, despite the fact that you know relatively nothing about the insects? That's what it's like here--I'm not familiar with the event (and subsequently have found it next to impossible to find any reputable source at all to explain it), but I know when someone is trying to push a point of view on me. I would quote a few specific passages to illustrate my point, but really the entire block of text is just unbelievaby preachy. Get rid of the references to the "good old boys,"the "Witch Hunt," the comparison to Henry the 7th, etc., and find some national press that asserts to notability and significance of the article. Otherwise, it's going to have to go altogether. And, although I don't really see much point in responding to your outlandish conspiracy theory, what other motives could I possibly have? I'm a computer programmer from Albuquerque, New Mexico, with no relatives or friends in Ohio, and yet you think I'm part of the "conspiracy" in Parma? Please. AmiDaniel (talk) 20:49, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Look, if we're going to talk insects, then I'd have to put my money down on the old praying mantis! :) The phrase "Witch Hunt" was used on bumper stickers, the old Parma-oh.com discussion forum and in at least three newspaper articles from two different newspapers.  "Good old boys" is also a widely used designation for Parma's machine.  If you want to say the "so-called good old boys," that's fine by me.  As for Henry VIII, well, the mayor did make statements about heads rolling a la Henry VIII of England or the queen in Alice in Wonderland.  Regards, --172.154.147.241 21:16, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

text: If the only thing "Henry VIII-like" about the statements is the phrase "heads will roll" itself, and if you can't cite a source comparing him to Henry VIII, then the mention of Henry VIII adds nothing but POV. Why Henry? Why not Robespierre or Vlad Dracul? Oh, let me guess: you didn't want to be incendiary.  - Jmabel | Talk 22:30, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the point is that statements about "heads rolling" from someone whose advisor calls himself a "samurai," as seen in the The Plain Dealer, and refers to Parma a "fiefdom," is suggestive of a monarchic mentality.  So, perhaps, "undemocratic statements" might be the better phrase?  Have a pleasant night and I hope Al S. didn't lose a finger when Hearst hammered his hand on Deadwood last night! --172.149.248.104 02:50, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible POV fork 

message: How is someone's personal site on maxpages.com a citable source? - Jmabel | Talk 22:33, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Easy, because it cites newspaper articles.  Best, --172.149.248.104 02:46, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: Is it verified that the blackout started in Parma? If so, maybe that would be worth mentioning? Also, what about when council president Ken K. made national news after saying in regards to black people that "we just don't want them here"? Again, that nasty chapter in Parma history did indeed make national news and had long term consequences due to legal battles between Parma and the NAACP. Another bit of Parma news was when they wanted to build a highway straight through the city! --24.154.173.243 17:29, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  There is a Wiki on the blackout and at least one New York Times article on the racism bit, so I added these as they make national news. I'm not sure why the two incidents that for sure made national news would get deleted by some users . . .--172.162.144.116 23:04, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  If you add the new york times bit as a reference, then I guess I can understand keeping that in. If you can find a reference that proves the blackoutinformation you added in, then that would eb acceptable, at least to me. Just don't take off the neutrality tag yet per reason #3. I'd rather not see yet another edit war when it looked like things cooled down. --Wizardman 01:57, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Okay, I put the dispute tag back on.  The Wiki article on the blackout provides the information on Parma in the blackout.--172.132.226.126 02:06, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Didn't see Parma in the blackout article at first, but I see it now. I still consider the commerce section mostly advertising, and I don't consider it a big deal whether that's up or not anyway. Hopefully what's up now will be a temporary compromise for both sides. --Wizardman 02:14, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I honestly don't intend the economy section to be an ad.  It mentions more than one store and just tells us about the stores and why their important for the city without saying "WOW!!  Look at the prices at X!  Shop here! Etc."  There is something to be said about how in the 1980s and early 1990s Parma had many more mom and pop stores, especially the small pet stores that have given way to the big chains of PetSmart and Pet Supplies Plus.  Parma Pets remains, but even RMS had to move away form Parmatown only to have a second Pet Supplies Plus pop up over by their new location at Broadview and PV.  Perhaps the larger lesson is the growth of chains and the decline of small businesses.  Yeah, it happens it many cities, but it's a valid point that does illustrate one of the trends in Parma's history. --172.147.192.103 04:19, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New edit war 

message: Maybe some photos could be added to this article about Parma Ohio ? www.geocities.com/berniethomas68 17:04, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good to me.  I'd like to see some photos, too. --24.154.173.243 04:58, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Humble suggestion for Photos

message: Please use  and the  tags to attach specific references to specific claims, instead of the haphazard method by which references are currently listed.  Thanks! --M@rēino 21:37, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cite News 

message: Okay, it seems as if the anon users and Mycroft have no idea how to come to a consensus on the economy. In all honesty, it has really become more of a problem than it should've ever been. I'm potecting it for now in order to figure out what exactly we should do with it. Post commetns regarding the economy section and future edits HERE insted of all around the page where no one can find them. Heck, taking out the economy section completely's starting to look good. --Wizardman 01:19, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I can understand why you would want to protect the page, but eliminating the economy section would be unnecessary as any city's economy is of course relevant and pertinent for an encylopedic article.  As I posted elsewhere, I'm in the campe of looking at it like this: those who want to expand on the economic section at least make the effort to constantly re-word the segment (i.e. to compromise) and to make the material fit better, whereas those who don't just mass delete the area, sometimes carelessly as well by "accidentally" deleting other portions of the article that aren't even disputed.  I think that the economy section even with the maximum amount of information is still relatively concise and if nothing else is harmlessly enough so as to not justifiably warrant such adamant persistence in trying to remove it.  You'd think there's a racial slur or something to get people so worked up, but the selection is neutral and constantly being improved.  I'd rather see efforts to revise than just destroy, especially if those who actually contribute new material put some time and thought into it.  And it does seem that much of this article is information added by the proponent(s) of the economic section, including links and the like that Mycroft and yourself have approved.  Best (and yes, I corrected some of your spelling; force of habit), --24.154.173.243 04:57, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree; the information does not somehow detract from the overall quality of the article.  Why some people would have such a hardon against it is beyond me . . .--172.144.193.100 20:28, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I understand why you think the economy additions aren't spam, but it really isn't necessary to list every little thing that a store offers. If you want to go in depth on RMS Aquaculture or something else, make a Wikipedia article on that. I encourage you guys to look at other big cities' economy sections such as Columbus, Ohio to get a better understanding of how to make that section. For example, phrasing the section such as "These particular specialty stores have, for example, collectively sold such diverse..." shows favoritism and bias in the article (I know it's unintentional). I don't mind the second paragraph that keeps getting deleted too much actually,and I'll look into that one moe to see what the problem is with Mycroft and that paragraph. --Wizardman 23:49, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Mycroft tried unsuccessfully to create an RMS article, but anyway, that section on pets is not just about RMS, it says that ALL of the various pet stores have COLLECTIVELY sold those items.  Perhaps just trim the list?  I wouldn't be opposed to someone making a new article about RMS, as the store has had stores in at least a half dozen locations (some Greenhouse initially, then a big store in Middleburg Heights, another in Willoughby, one in Parma by the mall, then one in Parma on Broadview and PV, another in Strongsville, and they had a website with online sales to people around the country, etc.  So, while not a PetSmart or Pet Supplies Plus, RMS is at least a chain that has tried expansionist ventures).  Cheers!  --140.254.69.123 17:25, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Unfortunately, the article on RMS Aquatics that has been recreated severally fails criterion A7 of the Speedy Deletion policy. A separate article on Parma businesses might be a better solution. --Ginkgo100 talk · e@ 04:44, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not a good explanation, but okay . . . --Mycroft.Holmz 12:15, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Sigh. Obviously not me. --Mycroft.Holmes 12:33, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What the?! --Mycroft.Holmz 12:51, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Every article has its resident ... ummmmm ... well ... [expletive deleted]. I guess there's no reason why this article should be any different. --Mycroft.Holmes 13:23, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yup, and YOU're it!  Lol!  Seriously, don't you like cheeseburgers? --Mycroft.Holmz 15:37, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Everyone has agreed to eliminate the comments on pet and video stores from the economy section, but why, Mycroft, would you still want to delete the one sentence on the Parmatown Mall.  How is that mall not significant to Parma's economy?  I don't see how a list of council presidents is a problem, when a list of mayors and other council people isn't.  The brief note in the demographic section about how Parma's position on the list of safest cities is factual and relevant and taken from bestselling almanacs available in most book stores.  It's true and significant that the city, while still on the list, has lost its position.  As for the history section, it is heavily referenced, was indeed the biggest news story for the city for the past three or more years (even was front page LEAD ARTICLE in the Plain Dealer for days in a row over terrorism and WMD articles!).  The nature of the text has been toned down dramatically, as well.  It really seems as if Mycroft just deletes any new change not done by himself without really examining the new edits.  You didn't want the pet stores mentioned, well we've agreed not to restore that; you thought the history was biased, well it has been revised multiple times and sourced.  You don't get to win every argument as you don't own this article and in some cases don't know what you're talking about.  Let's end this already and not delete anything form the current version, because a majority supports the current version.  Feel free to contribute new material or reword sentences in a better way, but knock off the unilateral deletions and treatment of this article as if it mycroftopedia rather than wikipedia.  Happy Halloween!  --164.107.92.120 17:52, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this page should be kept protected until at least December, because while 164.107.92.120 and some others seem to be approaching this constructively, I can see the hardcore reverters just returning to their old tricks the second it's unprotected.  So, admins, please keep this article protected for at least another month to make the reverters lose interest.  Thanks, --64.12.116.131 21:26, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

text: That RMS store in Parma (just the one in Parma) was recently bought by some other company, so I don't think you need to be worried about the economic dispute anymore.  In other words, those who wanted the pet store information included, have no reason to re-add it.  Everything in the history section, however, can be backed up by scores of newspaper articles and the like.  Look at how many articles the Plain Dealer alone devoted to this matter and their website section devoted to the topic doesn't even include all of the articles they had: http://www.cleveland.com/parmapolice/ If you combined the Sun News articles and all the TV coverage, well . . . --164.107.92.120 21:30, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

text: The whole reason why it was a witch hunt is that they made these false allegations against the police only to then have an expense investigation that ran longer than agreed upon in the contract followed by a review of the investigation and then yet another investigation only to determine that the alleged overtime scandal really didn't take place.  The police were front page news for several days and as the lead story and presented as villains with letters to the editor by citizens claiming to be afraid to give their names and the like only for three different investigations to finally conclude that much of what the two newspaper reporters alleged was either not true, not a crime or abuse of anything, and/or grossly exaggerated.  So, yes, if you read the pre-investigation articles written in an incredibly biased language calling Parma the worst police department in the state, etc, versus the articles after the THREE investigations, you'll find that the police as a whole suffered incredible media and political scrutiny only be essentially cleared in the end.  The politicians talked about heads rolling and offerred other hyperbolic statements BEFORE the investigations even took place, instead of responding more along the lines of "These are serious accusations and we'll look into them."  Moreover, Baldwin-Wallace produced an article that found pages of misleading statements and outright inaccuracies in The Plain Dealer series on the Parma Police that were picked up as facts by other media sources.  One blunder, which The Plain Dealer finally acknowledged as a mistake, was a negative article that kept repeating Parma police, when they meant Brookpark. So, you had some kind of hostile make the police look bad article that was really about an incident in Brookpark show up with Parma in the headline and in the article as well.  How can you mess up the name of the city that many times on the front of the metro page, where the Parma police received tons of calls complaining, only to have buried in the paper a "correction" that they really meant Brookpark?!  There really was no overtime scandal on the police's part as alleged by the Plain Dealer and instead of questioning the slipshod reporting, the city council and mayoral candidates just reacted as if it were true, and then enaged in public quarrels with the investigators only to in the end have reports that cost the city tens of thousands of dollars completely refute the Plain Dealer's allegations.  In the end, the politicians (DePiero and company) tried to put the new spin of "see the police were good all along" on the matter, apparently completely ignoring their previous statements that they made in the hopes of looking tough prior to an election.  I'm not saying, nor do I believe, that every Parma officer is a "saint," but what was alleged against them was determined by THREE different investigators NOT to be criminal, cost the city hundreds of thousands of dollars, and needlessly ruined the police departments reputation.  I don't know if I would call the police "the good guys," but most of them certainly were victims.  And it is far from obvious, if you're familiar with the whole story and all of the news reports, the actual investigation reports, etc. that there was any kind of scandal.  Even the Plain Dealer changed its tune once the three investigations were concluded.  The media attacked the police based on false leads and the politicians jumped on the bandwagon only to have both reverse their positions in the end when after two years the police as a whole were cleared.  There was no overtime scandal, only a witch hunt.  Happy Thanksgiving! --24.154.173.243 22:28, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Alright then, let's say you're right, there was no scandal, the police are good people, etc. Why is only one side of the story being presented in the wikipedia article and the references then? Instead of saying "a happened, then b happened, then c happened...", you seem to be saying "a happened, than b happened, and x was right, then c happened and y was being bad about it becuase they knew x was right." Your references are almost exclusively pro-police, with the only plain dealer one mainly being filegate. The references seem to say that there could be a political machine, but doesn't confirm that there is one. AS I said, I'll look over things. Can I prove there was an overtime problem? Technically no because it violates WP:OR. I guess my main problem is that your references don't go with the meat of the article. I'll try and look for references that will help what's up there. If I don't find any then parts of it (not all) will coem down. --Wizardman 04:07, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that you should keep the quote by Councilwoman Stys that appeared in the paper in which she called the investigation a "sham" as it is verifiable (from a newspaper article) and uttered by a recognizable figure (a councilperson) that further justifies that characterization of the fiasco as a "witch hunt."  Best, --164.107.92.120 23:19, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protection