Talk:Ann Arbor, Michigan/Archive 3

message: *Consider a section about how environmentally concious we are. The a2ecycle.org link keeps getting removed from the external links section and Ann Arbor has a HUGE recycling following and this is just one of the many ways A2 recycles. There are over 4,000 people "freecycling" in this community via the a2ecycle.org link and even more recycling on a daily basis through the enormous amount of other recycling organizations in Ann Arbor.
**Last I checked, most of the people in the Ann Arbor freecycle group aren't from ann arbor.  Ann Arbor has more internet access (and had access earlier) than most of S.E. michigan, so its online communities tend to attract disproportionate numbers of outsiders.  Normally Detroit would fulfil this function, but it doesn't have very high internet penetration (or didn't till recently).  I'd add that more development downtown would do 100 times more for the environment (by reducing sprawl, pollution, etc.) than the recycling program.  Tlogmer 20:43, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recycling 

message: Why is this graph blank? MarkBuckles 02:10, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have also noticed the blank graphs, though I have no idea what happened. I suspect it may have something to do with the image files on the Wikipedia servers (which we cannot be able to address unless someone is willing to upload the images again). PentawingTalk 05:05, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparison with national averages 

message: I reverted the infobox photo put up by User:Shengzhoumi2 to the one by User:Gsgeorge.  The newer one was a bit weak in terms of composition and overall quality, with nearly half of the frame occupied by trees and other greenery.  It is Tree Town, but I think that users looking at the page would want to see a more striking photo, a better and more aesthetically appealing shot of the actual skyline.  That, and the fact that the older photo had all of the legal stuff sorted out, but that is besides the point of overall quality.  If anyone has any problems with this let me know here.Fedallah 23:50, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox photo 

message: I've heard rumors that the town was named for a prostitute? Sounds crazy to me, is that true? --AW 23:04, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess that's it. thanks --AW 21:56, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Named for a prostitute? 

message: Is there a reason that "Harvest Mission Community Church, a multiethnic church in Ann Arbor" got put onto the External Links? If not, let's take it off, because clearly every church in Ann Arbor should not be noted among the general-info sites in this list. Thanks. Ropcat 06:18, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, Rees11, for removing it. Ropcat 02:47, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

text: You're welcome! Thanks for catching this. Rees11 03:28, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: I removed Google from the list of major employers. I assume "major" means "large number of employees."
Is Domino's really located in the city? I always thought it was just outside the city. I can't find a map of the city limits right now but the official city web site says the address of Domino's Farms (Frank Lloyd Wright Dr) is not in the city. Rees11 03:56, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Employers 

message: WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA! __earth (Talk) 09:38, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  I MISS A2 

message: I added a sentence about Ann Arbor consistently ranking high on annual 'best places to live' lists. I thought this was important for people looking to move to the area and wondering about the overall quality of life. SueA2 (talk) 17:49, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: I removed the part about a trolley to Briarwood. First, it's wrong, this was going to be light rail, not a trolley, and the tracks are not disused. Second, it's obsolete, this has not been discussed in years as far as I know. Feel free to put this back in if you have a source for this information. Rees11 11:39, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transportation 

message: UMS: Is this really a performing arts group? They don't perform themselves, they bring in groups to perform. Maybe I'm being too nit-picky. If we do mention them, shouldn't we give the full name rather than the acronym? Do we really want to say they're 129 years old, which means someone will have to edit the article and bump the age once a year? Better to say what year they were founded.
"Ann Arbor ranks first among U.S. cities in the number of booksellers and books sold per capita." This oft-repeated claim was debunked in a story in the (I think) February Observer about Ann Arbor myths. Rees11 16:32, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed UMS as the organization, from my knowledge, is associated with UM. As for the booksellers per capita, can you provide a link to the source you are talking about? I can't seem to be able to get a hold of the Ann Arbor Observer online. PentawingTalk 00:53, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Culture 

message: I removed the new list of sister cities. I don't think we need two lists, and the new one was incorrect; Peterborough linked to the one in England, for example. Rees11 16:56, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sister Cities 

message: I would not say that State Street and South U are part of downtown. To me, downtown ends and campus begins at Division. But I don't have a reference so maybe it's just me.
I also changed the part where it says the Arb is near downtown but again I have no reference, so I will yield to majority opinion on this if everyone else thinks I'm wrong. Rees11 16:57, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A few data points: I've also always thought of downtown as extending only to somewhere around Division. However, I also know many people who include central campus and its adjacent commercial areas in their definition of downtown. BobDively 17:29, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There are a lot of different ways to define "downtown", but regardless of how you do, saying that the Arb is just east of central campus is better. As to the question of what constitutes downtown, I see a narrow and a broad interpretation.
**Narrow: Downtown is approximately bounded by Ashley on the west, Division on the east, William on the south, and Catherine on the north.
**Broad: Downtown is approximately bounded by the train tracks on the west, Washtenaw/Forest on the east, Hill on the south, and the Huron River to the north. Cmadler 18:12, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geography 

message: Recently, someone added the following passage to the article:
:Ann Arbor also boasts several locally owned, decades-old unique retail survivors that also function as retail tourist attractions. One example is Sam's Clothing, which opened in the 1940s and resembles a lower-cost L.L. Bean, selling 'basic clothing' (jeans, t-shirts, sneakers, and socks). Another store is The Blue Front Party Store, called this ('Blue') because the original owner sold children's toys and adult magazines side by side. In 1981, the owner died and left the store to his favorite employee, who auctioned off all the old toys for their original grease penciled-on prices. It then became much the full-service, legendary party store it is today.
Though I am familiar with the two stores, the problem is that I can't find any online sources describing them in detail. Recently, there is a Wikipedia user who is demanding citations for many articles, including those that are featured (the above passage has no citations). Hence, can anyone try to dig up some other sources that can be used as citations? Thanks. PentawingTalk 23:10, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ann Arbor shops and businesses 

message: I know nothing, but this seems notable. --AVRS 10:09, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: yeah, it's important. it's the featured article on Sunday's front page. Shakey Jake is an Ann Arbor icon- if Blanket Man has an entire article devoted to him, then i think Shakey Jake should at least have some mention on the Ann Arbor page.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.46.116.204 (talk) 22:17, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shaky Jake Woods 

message: Do we really need so much detail on the major highways? Also, US-12 doesn't actually go through Ann Arbor, does it? Rees11 (talk) 18:29, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The current US-12 does not. The original one did: it was Jackson Road.—Chowbok ☠ 17:26, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major highways 

message: Since you are slated for front page, I decided to review the page. We had some interesting and odd comments upon our front page FA a few days ago for Minneapolis. 
* Intro terribly short! You ought to expand it with points perhaps from culture or educationn. It should note some of the highlights of each section. Three paragraphs is a much fuller and concise lead.
* History it needs to be combined into paragraphs, not individual sentences. it looks like a random assortment of trivial facts. remember, a reader needs to feel like they're being introduced to how Ann Arbor came into being and how it might have affected the world. Draw on the main article to expand it. And a lot of opinions and claims with no sources (Human Rights Party and gentrification paragraphs).
* Geography and cityscape I don't understand why the Census data has been left in, there should be an introductory paragraph not data points.
* Demographics again census data but no prose
* Law and government Good! this is a good example of how to write a section. Wikiproject city MOS prefers SIster Cities to be its own section near the bottom of the page.
* Economy Pretty good. The Borders moving information is rather excessive unless its somehow notable how they moved around town. Could use another photo.
* Education Good, what I expect from Ann Arbor.
* Culture/Med/Health Perfect
* Transportation Its not necessary to itemize the highways, its not very helpful nor is very descriptive for people. Writing into prose would be much clearer.
That's it! If you could improve the first few sections, this page is going to be solid. At the moment, I am a bit worried you will lose FA status on next review. The short intro, while might have worked back in the day, is not going to fly at all and in fact is an indicator of a weak city page. See San Francisco for probably the best FA City article out there. .:davumaya:. 09:19, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the tips. I've moved Sister Cities to a separate section at the end, and moved the list of highways in-line. Both are easy changes and do improve the article I think. I proposed fixing the highway list a few months ago and no one objected. Rees11 (talk) 15:41, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I just spent a couple hours adding references, copyediting, and expanding the lead. Should be good enough for the Main Page now. Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 20:49, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Fabulous work! .:davumaya:. 01:23, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 2008 

message: I would just like to say that this is one of the best articles I've read.  Well done!--Nick54321blastoff (talk) 02:10, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thankyou! 

message: That's a song lyric dating back at least to the sixties, probably earlier. The Ann Arbor Area Convention & Visitors Bureau claims, "There is only one Ann Arbor in the world..."
That may be so, but Pardes Hanna translates as "Ann Orchard," close enough for horseshoes. __Just plain Bill (talk) 03:59, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "There is only one Ann Arbor" 

message: Why is the location (coordinates) so precise? =Nichalp «Talk»= 12:08, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a good question. I assumed it was the precise location of some landmark, like the center of the street coordinate system. But I looked it up, and it's in the parking lot of some frat house (Theta Chi?) off South U. I suggest we either improve the accuracy or reduce the precision. Rees11 (talk) 13:34, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

text: I plugged in the coordinates of USGS marker NE0696, which is at the southeast corner of the Courthouse and the closest to the center of the street coordinate system I could find. Also rounded to whole seconds. Rees11 (talk) 13:55, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ann Arbor being a university town, it seems quite appropriate to centre it in a frat house parking lot. Wanderer57 (talk) 14:40, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Precise location? 

message: Thanks for the article.  Ann Arbor is a lovely city, based on my recollections of a visit there many years ago.
I'm curious about this sentence from the opening paragraph: "It is the state's seventh largest city with a population of 114,024 as of the 2000 census, of which 36,892 (32%) are college or graduate students".
As the University of Michigan is the largest educational institution, why are "university students" not mentioned? It seems to me that "university or college students" would better fit the situation.  Graduate students are (almost always) "university students" I believe.
Thanks, Wanderer57 (talk) 13:37, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "College or graduate students" 

message: If anyone cares, there is substantial evidence for the "tree town" nickname. First, if you want something official, the City government's internal events newsletter is the Tree Town Log. Second, try the Google test. There are more than twice as many hits for "town" as for "city." Finally, the Ann Arbor News is not searchable, but the Daily is, and there are plenty of hits that could be used as references:
+site:michigandaily.com "tree town" "tree+town"&btnG=Search
The confusion may stem from Ann Arbor's designation as a Tree City USA by the Arbor Day Foundation. Rees11 (talk) 18:39, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tree Town vs City 

message: The weather statistics are currently drawn from stats for Ypsilanti. Stats for Ann Arbor should be drawn from a source about Ann Arbor, such as those provided by MSU's Ann Arbor weather station, no? Vassyana (talk) 18:18, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There are several weather stations in Ann Arbor, and readings between them vary measurably.  The one at the Ann Arbor Municipal Airport, is off from the one on North Campus at AOSS. Edward Vielmetti (talk) 18:38, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see how that addresses my concern. Regardless of variation between weather stations in Ann Arbor, shouldn't the article reference Ann Arbor statistics instead of relying on stats for Yypsilanti? Vassyana (talk) 18:42, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

text: The problem is that information from the weather station at Ann Arbor Municipal Airport appears to be lacking (particularly with regards to precipitation and snowfall). Hence, the use of the weather station at Willow Run Airport (which provides more comprehensive data). So far, I am unsure where else to look for comprehensive average weather information exclusively within Ann Arbor (Weather Underground and the National Weather Service do not appear to make it easy to find such information, particularly in table format). However, I would appreciate it if someone does find the information somewhere. PentawingTalk 04:55, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weather stats 

message: Generally, I am not a fan of photo galleries within articles. Hence, I have moved the gallery here. In any case, I believe that the images should be transferred to Wikimedia Commons (as the images are under GFDL). PentawingTalk 04:55, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo gallery 

message: These passages are relevant to the article, yet are in need of citation. I think I have found an article that can support these passages, but I cannot be able to access the full article (the article is entitled Soulless Cities: Ann Arbor, the Cutting Edge of Discipline: Postfordism, Postmodernism, and the New Bourgeoisie by Corey Dolgon). PentawingTalk 01:36, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The economy of Ann Arbor underwent a gradual shift from a manufacturing base to a service and technology base during the 20th century, which accelerated in the 1970s and 1980s. At the same time, the downtown transformed from one dominated by retail establishments dealing in staple goods to one composed mainly of eateries, cafés, bars, clubs, and specialty shops.
I suspect tourism is the city's biggest industry now but I have been unable to find any good sources. Rees11 (talk) 04:03, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

text: Surely the University of Michigan is the city's biggest industry?—Chowbok ☠ 17:27, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation needed for the following 

message: For anyone interested, I took a number of photos of historic properties in Ann Arbor.  They're all on Commons at . Andrew Jameson (talk) 18:56, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: Couldn't we find a more pleasant photo of Ann Arbor then the billboards/back of buildings pic that pops up on Facebook?  Not really sure how this works, but I would prefer a scene of downtown, the river or maybe the Arb...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.93.1.248 (talk) 21:28, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ugly photo 

message: The above #Revert move move proposal was improperly closed and I've requested that the decision be reviewed by an uninvolved admin.
See: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Improper_move_closer_by_non-admin_User:macr86_at_Talk:Ann_Arbor.
--Born2cycle (talk) 20:14, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I've reverted this obviously inappropriate and out of process move and discussion closure. The discussion will close naturally, when no-one else is commenting, or a clear consensus has developed. Neither is the case so far. After that happens, a move can be contemplated, depending on the outcome of the discussion. Jayjg (talk) 01:04, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: If that standard had been followed in the first move we might not be here now. That discussion was closed less than twelve hours after someone commented. Was that an appropriate closure?   Will Beback  talk   01:14, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't examined that old history, Will, but it's long in the past now. This discussion is still fresh. Jayjg (talk) 01:19, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It's relevant, and not so long past. The new discussions was started very soon after the first discussion because of the perception that it had been closed too hastily, with too little input. If you're not willing to look at the history of the moves then maybe it would have been better to allow an uninvolved admin to handle it.   Will Beback  talk   01:23, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It's relevant, but we're in the middle of this discussion now. This discussion still needs to actually conclude, which it obviously has not yet done. Jayjg (talk) 01:33, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you think that an involved admin such as yourself is the best person to make that decision?   Will Beback  talk   01:48, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not drop this meta-topic, and focus on what the page should be named? -GTBacchus(talk) 01:51, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: That's fine, so long as I get to reserve the right to reopen the discussion and move the article back if I don't like the outcome. ;) 
=== Previous closure ===
I'm happy enough for my earlier closure to be reviewed, but it seems to me that the real decision to make is what the page should be called. If I was overly hasty in closing the December discussion - which it seems I may have been - then seeing this discussion result in a move back to Ann Arbor, Michigan will make that clear, and I will proceed having learned a little bit more about the community's stand on naming conventions.  Please remember that move discussions are different from AfDs, and a "no consensus" doesn't result in "no move" every time. We actually have to use one title or another one, and RM closers generally understand that they are to choose the best title, based on arguments presented in the discussion. -GTBacchus(talk) 01:55, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

text: This is a very skewed view of closure, in my opinion.  Consensus should be taken into account when closing, and for an uninvolved person to take it on his or her self to "choose the best title" would be tantamount to imposing one individual's subjective opinion on those who have actually participated in the discussion. Deb (talk) 04:28, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It depends on whether you look at the role of a closer to be essentially a vote counter who simply calculates and declares which side has the majority, or a judge who evaluates the arguments on both sides and declares which side is better supported by argument based in policy, guidelines, conventions and reason.   Your view, apparently, is more in line with the vote counter perspective, which explains your apparent lack of interest to present good arguments or even participate in discourse in these discussions.  I mean, if you expect the closer to simply count your vote and give it equal weight regardless of how well your position is supported, it's no wonder you don't bother to say anything much beyond merely indicating support or opposition of a move proposal.  --Born2cycle (talk) 04:44, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Deb, what you describe ("imposing one individual's subjective opinion on those who have actually participated in the discussion") is not what I was talking about, nor how I close moves. It appears I didn't express myself very well. I read consensus, both from the discussion in front of me, and from the context of having seen many moves and many conversations regarding the naming conventions. That context is important, and I can see how my having omitted it gave you the wrong idea. I think that my view of closings is not so skewed, because I do it all the time, and my success rate is well over 99%. This is a case where I think I made a bad call, and I'm learning, but I'm not learning that my overall view of the process is problematic. I just read consensus poorly in this case. -GTBacchus(talk) 05:06, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I do not have any doubt of your good faith or indeed your capabilities.  I just wanted to double-check that you did not mean that consensus was irrelevant.  There are unfortunately one or two editors who would take what you said as carte blanche to close move discussions and make sure the end result is what they wanted all along. So I'm glad we see eye to eye.  Deb (talk) 12:46, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improper closure 

message: I'm happy enough for my earlier closure to be reviewed, but it seems to me that the real decision to make is what the page should be called. If I was overly hasty in closing the December discussion - which it seems I may have been - then seeing this discussion result in a move back to Ann Arbor, Michigan will make that clear, and I will proceed having learned a little bit more about the community's stand on naming conventions.  Please remember that move discussions are different from AfDs, and a "no consensus" doesn't result in "no move" every time. We actually have to use one title or another one, and RM closers generally understand that they are to choose the best title, based on arguments presented in the discussion. -GTBacchus(talk) 01:55, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a very skewed view of closure, in my opinion.  Consensus should be taken into account when closing, and for an uninvolved person to take it on his or her self to "choose the best title" would be tantamount to imposing one individual's subjective opinion on those who have actually participated in the discussion. Deb (talk) 04:28, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It depends on whether you look at the role of a closer to be essentially a vote counter who simply calculates and declares which side has the majority, or a judge who evaluates the arguments on both sides and declares which side is better supported by argument based in policy, guidelines, conventions and reason.   Your view, apparently, is more in line with the vote counter perspective, which explains your apparent lack of interest to present good arguments or even participate in discourse in these discussions.  I mean, if you expect the closer to simply count your vote and give it equal weight regardless of how well your position is supported, it's no wonder you don't bother to say anything much beyond merely indicating support or opposition of a move proposal.  --Born2cycle (talk) 04:44, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Deb, what you describe ("imposing one individual's subjective opinion on those who have actually participated in the discussion") is not what I was talking about, nor how I close moves. It appears I didn't express myself very well. I read consensus, both from the discussion in front of me, and from the context of having seen many moves and many conversations regarding the naming conventions. That context is important, and I can see how my having omitted it gave you the wrong idea. I think that my view of closings is not so skewed, because I do it all the time, and my success rate is well over 99%. This is a case where I think I made a bad call, and I'm learning, but I'm not learning that my overall view of the process is problematic. I just read consensus poorly in this case. -GTBacchus(talk) 05:06, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I do not have any doubt of your good faith or indeed your capabilities.  I just wanted to double-check that you did not mean that consensus was irrelevant.  There are unfortunately one or two editors who would take what you said as carte blanche to close move discussions and make sure the end result is what they wanted all along. So I'm glad we see eye to eye.  Deb (talk) 12:46, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Previous closure 

message: Please comment at Talk:Michigan_Wolverines#Solid_Maize_Block_M_vs._split_block_M.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR)  15:20, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Michigan logo