Talk:Seattle/Archive 1

message: How is the statue not a political statement?  Seriously, if I "saved" a statue of Adolf Hitler during World War II and put it in Seattle, how would you take it?  What would you say if I told you that you had misinterpreted it as a political statement?
Living in Seattle, and more importantly going to the UW, has allowed me to get a pretty good feel for the type of people that live here.  Anyone who lives here knows, that if a statue of a Hitler was erected it would be ripped down in a second (by Liberals and Conservatives alike).  In addition, any statues depicting the Bible or any conservative movement would be interpreted as a political statement.
Just because we live in one of the most liberal cities in America doesn’t mean that we get to bend the rules when we don’t like how they apply to leftist statues and artwork.  Come on people, let’s be honest about this...
*Personally, I never thought of the statue in Fremont as a political statement, but as post-Soviet kitsch. However, I do think saying "it's often interpreted as..." is weasel-wordy. Veronique 20:54, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The Statue of Vladimir Lenin

message: I thought it made sense to combine the Events and History sections with the Founding section. It would be good at some point to figure out a natural flow to this page and make sure the sections follow it; now, each section is good but the overall structure seems a little haphazard. -- Scarequotes 16:38, May 6, 2004 (UTC)
:I agree--there's lots of good content here but as an overall article it leaves a lot to be desired. --Lukobe 17:28, 6 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Consolidation

message: It was probably wise of Lukobe to decide to limit businesses to those that do interstate commerce. 
That said, what should the format be for using actual business names vs. familiar abbreviations? We've got Cranium, Inc. and Vulcan Inc., but the Co. after Jones Soda was eliminated. I'd vote for using the full business title in this context, but if we don't want to do that we should be consistent and get rid of the visible Inc.'s. -- Scarequotes 21:50, May 5, 2004 (UTC)
:I'm in favor of using the more familiar forms of business names, personally, but I am definitely open to going the other way. Anyone else have an opinion?
:Lukobe 22:29, 5 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: List of companies

message: I wrote a paper on the history of Seattle. I'd like to contribute it, but I'm not sure the best way to do this. 
-- Emmett Shear
sarbandia@hotmail.com
:The best thing you could do is to integrate in the important facts into the current article.  Is the paper a history of Seattle?  If it is, I would imagine you could probably include the paper wholesale in a new section titled "History of Seattle" immediately after the table of contents.  If the paper is very long, you may want to look at the article on London for an example.  That article has a one paragraph "History of London" section, with a link to history of London and the full version there.  A history of Seattle page would be appropriate if you have enough material. -- RobLa 05:24, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)
replies: text:  I just noticed this here on Talk. I've recently added a ton of 19th century history to this page, but haven't really brought it past 1900. Emmett, you should certainly have a shot at filling in anything you consider salient that I've missed on the 19th century, but it would be great if you would start carrying the framework forward into the 20th century. Let me know what you want to do. I'll probably just get out of your way for a while. I think we are getting enough material that later we may want to cut the history material in this article back to a summary and introduce one or more History of Seattle articles (see, for example, what we've done with Romania, History of Romania, and other related articles). But first, let's get the content in, then worry about structure. Jmabel 02:03, 20 Nov 2003 (UTC)
replies: text:  I see that this History of Seattle page now exists. At a quick read, some of it is valuable, some of it is redundant to material under Seattle, and I believe some of it is just wrong. I'm inclined to try to move material around more appropriately between the two articles, and try to identify factual discrepancies, unless someone else would rather take this on. I'm also posting this on Talk:History of Seattle. If no one else claims out this task by Dec 10, I'll plunge in. -- Jmabel 07:49, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: History of Seattle paper

message: This article really should be at Seattle since this is world known as Seattle, Washington and therefore doesn't need a disambiguating title. I'll change this later. --maveric149
:Seattle now redirects here. So this is OK. --maveric149
More talk on naming issue is at Talk:Seattle
:Note: that page is now at Talk:Seattle/Archive 0. Graham87 14:36, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Naming issues

message: An anon recently added Adobe Systems to the list of companies HQ'd in Seattle. I don't believe Seattle is their HQ, although they have a large presence there. Anyway, someone might want to check this. -- Jmabel 03:36, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Adobe is not headquartered in Seattle. It's headquartered in San Jose. I'll fix it. --Lukobe 04:45, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: List of companies, part II

message: I just added a link to the Seattle Datasheet. The datasheet has a wealth of information that could be incorporated into this article. ShadowDragon 05:53, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Info source

message: By moving parts of this article to new articles, i have parsed the size down from 45K to 37K. it'd be nice to get it under 35K, if anyone wants to try to help. Kingturtle 21:32, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  article size 

message: I was going to post this on the nomination page, but decided it would be better here: "As a side note, I think we should consider removing the 'Seattle institutions' header, and promote all the sections in it, (or break the section into smaller categories) as the third and fourth level headers look so similar it gets confusing."
Also, I think if someone more familiar (than me) with the subject adds some approximate dates to the Economy subsection of the History, and re-titles it something like 'Economic history', that might make it stand-alone enuf to overcome the objections. Niteowlneils 05:29, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I also decided I didn't want to add this to the nomination page, either: "(I also think the long, rambling paragraph that basically says 'on the whole, Seattle is quite liberal' could be trimmed a lot, but don't want to try to do it myself)". Niteowlneils 05:30, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

text: Great, and nice catch on the billboard--certainly made a big enuf splash at the time. Niteowlneils 01:00, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Economy and structure (from FAC discussion)

message: I see that all mention of Bertha Knight Landes and Bailey Gatzert has now been cut. This seems to me like an odd decision. Is it linked somewhere that I am missing? At least it should be a see also, no? -- Jmabel | Talk 23:01, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)
:To the best of my knowledge, I have only moved content, without cutting anything. I moved the mayor comments to Government and politics of Seattle, Washington, but since I'm basically done trying to shrink it, I can move them back to the main page if that doesn't bump it from 34K to 35K. Niteowlneils 00:42, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: They're back, and it's still only 34K. Niteowlneils 01:00, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  mayors 

message: Sarajevo Johannesburg Newark, New Jersey Marshall, Texas San Jose, California Seattle, Washington
 History Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
 Geography Yes Partial Yes Yes Yes Yes
 Climate Yes Yes     Yes Yes
 Bodies of water         text Sub-page
 Demographics Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
 Government
 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
 Crime   Yes     text text
 Utilities         Yes Yes
 Sports Yes table text   Yes Yes
 Museums, etc. text   Yes   Yes Yes
 Medicine           Yes
 Neighborhoods Divisions Divisions Yes   Yes Sub-page
 Street layout       Yes   Sub-page
 Economy Yes Yes   Yes Yes Yes
 Notable natives Yes   text Yes Yes Sub-page
 Parks         text Sub-page
 Music           text
 Newspapers Yes Yes     Yes Yes
 Radio Yes       Yes Yes
 TV Yes       Yes Yes
 Transportation Yes Yes     Yes Yes
 Colleges Yes Yes text List Yes text
 Schools Yes       Yes text
 Libraries         Yes Sub-page
 Suburbs   Yes     Link to county#cities Sub-page
 Sister cities       text Yes Sub-page
 City in literature       text   Sub-page
 Trivia     Yes Yes    
 Infobox   Yes     Yes Yes
 Division box Yes       Yes Yes
 Article size 32K 27K 30K 24K 50K 34K
(forgot to sign--also, congrats to everyone that contributed content to one of the most comprehensive city articles. Niteowlneils 04:59, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Comparison of topics and size with other city Featured Articles

message: For whatever it's worth, the info I added about the jail [besides personal experience :/] came from here. I think some Sea inmates stay at the Kent regional center, but since I'm not certain, I won't add it. Niteowlneils 02:32, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Jail ref

message: With even the Talk page now close to 32kB, and Niteowlneils having tried in vain to prune the article, clearly some topics (eg sport or culture - including some of the bands mentioned above - or government?) need to go the way of History. And even the residual History section may be unnecessarily long in view of the fact that there is a main article about it.  Robin Patterson 00:16, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Time for more spinoffs

message: I guess I've made my contribution- Mayor Greg Nickels was listed on the referenced page as being non-partisan. His office confirms he is, in fact, a registered Democrat, so the error was corrected.
But the Seattle mayor is Non-Partisan and not elected by party, as are all other city offices... so what's the point of adding in a party affiliation? Aep 23:50, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The office is a non-partisan office, but the man is proudly a member of a party, and I'm pretty certain he's served in partisan offices in the past. -- Jmabel | Talk 00:26, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just the facts, Ma'am 

message: I see that "regrading projects" was disambiguated to Denny Regrade, but the regrade around Jackson Street was of comparable (though lesser) magnitude; there might have been others I'm not thinking of right now. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:57, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't think of any others right now either, but the Jackson regrade was certainly substantial. Where'd the link go before? --Lukobe 05:58, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regrades 

message: After skimming this "featured" article I found some "bad words" that had not been caught by the previous revert.  Then I scanned it again and found one more.  So I decided to read it with a fine-toothed comb and found several MORE things.  It should now be clean down to the section-heading "Climate."  I had to stop reading because my eyes were starting to hurt reading in "edit" mode.  Now it is someone else's turn to try to clean up the rest of it.  6SJ7 14:12, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  There is vandalism interspersed throughout this article 

message: The text emphasizes that the Space Needle isn't downtown, but appears so in the many photos taken of it from Queen Anne that show it in front of the downtown buildings.  Then the Space Needle photo in the article is ... taken from Queen Anne, and makes it look like it's downtown!  How about a Space Needle photo showing all the empty area around it?  Tempshill 17:38, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: What empty area...or do you mean one with Elliott Bay as the background, or Queen Anne as the background? --Lukobe 05:59, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It's pretty clear in the "skyline" picture. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:01, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

text: On a good day, you can see the downtown skyline from almost anywhere in the city. It's a moot point, I'd say.Atinoda 05:15, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Space needle photo vs. text 

message: Retrieved this from the article:
“Will the last person leaving Seattle — Turn out the lights”. 
Yes, the quote really did have a dash in the middle. http://www.historylink.org/output.cfm?file_ID=1287
--Lukobe 05:56, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  billboard 

message: The recently added Twoop timeline (in the external links) strikes me as mediocre at best. Is there really any reason to keep this link? -- Jmabel | Talk 05:49, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I have replaced that link with this one from the Seattle Times. The previous one had 42 events, while this one has ~200, plus pictures. EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 06:05, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Much better. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:48, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Timeline? 

message: I found this  "By most accounts, Chief Seattle was a great speaker and skilled diplomat. He was born in 1786, and his real name in the Lushootseed language was See-ahth. Whites found it nearly impossible to pronounce. [...] A year later, the chief signed a treaty with the United States Government, ceding much of the area on which the city of Seattle now stands" Maybe it should be on  or I dunno. {sjöar}
:It already is: in the intro and in the founding section. --WAvegetarian 19:22, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Oops, nevermind. I remembered seeing his name in both places, but there isn't anything about him ceding land. There is an allusion to it on his own page. --WAvegetarian 19:28, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name origin 

message: In 2005 Forbes magazine ranked Seattle to be the most overpriced city in the US based on median home prices and median incomes.
NOTE: The proceeding comment was made by an anon IP in the article. 9 Nov 2005
:If that's accurate, why was it removed from the main article? http://www.forbes.com/realestate/2005/07/14/overpriced-cities-lifestyle-cx_sc_0715home_ls.html?partner=msn --SarekOfVulcan 02:53, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Forbes

message: were the WTO riots really that defining of Seattle?  I do not believe they should be mentioned more than once and should not show up in the 3rd paragraph...
* I'd guess that internationally when one hears the word "Seattle" these days, at least one time in ten that is what is being referred to. -- Jmabel | Talk 07:25, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: "The WTO riots" is a framing of the debate, as defined by corporate media. WTO in Seattle is also a complex, nuanced social phenomenon that is both local and global, is grass-roots global village rather than top-down, contrasting with the corporate globalization characterized by the WTO (to use excessive shorthand to remain succinct). Wikipedia and Wikipedians need to exercise due care in avoiding newspeak of pre-digested, ulterior framing.
  Careful research documents that there is far more to this topic than corporate media* reports--which Wikipedia is well-suited to address.
  "I'd guess that internationally", from the first prominent delay in Geneva, 1998, Seattle demonstrably had a role in that the roll of WTO has been stalled to this day, and that vastly more important than characterizing the event as (merely sensational) riots. The vigil completely surrounding the opening gala, the simultaneous conference at Benaraya Hall, each vastly outnumbered the (initially police-instigated) riots, yet were little reported by corporate media.  _____  [asterisk] "mainstream media" in Newspeak  --GoDot 07:06, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  WTO 

message: The sentence about Seattle being in the rain shadow of the Olympics was deleted.  I'm putting some references here for WP:Verify and restoring it.
* Rain map, Seattle, with under fourty inches of rain a year, is more than sequim but much less than the cascades.
* KOMO weather explanation "If the Olympics weren't there, Seattle would probably get closer to 50-60 inches of rain a year."
Hope that's a nice enough reference. SchmuckyTheCat 20:52, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: rain shadow

message: Should the Yukon Gold Rush of 1896-7 be included in the Major Events section? As far as I know, it was pretty big in the economic growth of the city. I really don't remember much, having only been to that little museum in Pioneer Square once...Atinoda 05:20, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it would be stretching things a bit to call it a Seattle event in this sense. We mention it in the Economic history section. -- Jmabel | Talk 08:49, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Major Events

message: Although the Seattle article is great, perhaps it needs to conform to MoS a tad bit more, esp. with the density of the blue links, which is almost overwhelming. Anyway, just a suggestion. --172.199.111.194 07:27, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure how we'd reduce those. With so many Wikipedians in one city, we've ended up with very thorough documentation of the city; I don't think we've written anything that doesn't merit an article, though, nor anything that isn't at least a moderately likely link for someone to want to follow. -- Jmabel | Talk 02:09, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Talk about internal links overload... 

message: seems like some of them have been messed up, e.g., Korean. --Lukobe 11:05, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All is now well. --Lukobe 21:34, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  interlanguage links