Talk:Ann Arbor, Michigan/Archive 2

message: I know the history section is supposed to be short, but is it okay that we have a ninety-year gap in there? (From 1851 to WWII.) Also, this section has said for a long time that the city was a hub for the civil rights movement. I know it figured prominently in the student movement and the peace movement, but what significant role did Ann Arbor play in the civil rights movement? I'm not sure that this is accurate, although I could be wrong. Ropcat 01:50, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Good question. I think it was a fairly placid place in terms of its impact on American history through most of those years, but that doesn't mean nothing happened here! One trend was the late 19th/early 20th century growth of industrialization and the expansion of the western part of the city to provide housing for the new workers it brought, mainly from Germany. The housing district is what we now know as the Old West Side. For a while there were two or more (I think) German-language newspapers in town, and several German-language churches. My memory of this stuff is rather dim and confused, and I don't have any sources handy, but it seems like a significant part of the Ann Arbor story. Marwil's book might have some info. rodii 15:37, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

text: 1.) The History section says flat-out that the town was named for the founders' wives and the area's stands of trees, but the new Introduction section hedges this with a "supposedly." Is the story documented fact or apocryphal? If the latter, we should hedge similarly in the History part. 2.) Just to repeat my question from the top: we're saying that the city was a hub for the civil rights movement. I know it figured prominently in the student movement and the peace movement, but did Ann Arbor really play a significant role specifically in the civil rights movement? Ropcat 05:51, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I corrected the first point. As for the civil rights movement, Ann Arbor did have a role in it, though not in the way that one associates with the civil rights movement that most Americans learn in elementary, middle, and high school. I looked at the Pictorial History of Ann Arbor through the AADL website (the article as a link to that site) which mentions actions that were taken by African-Africans in Ann Arbor during the civil rights movement, including reparations. Pentawing 06:32, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I vote for retaining the "supposedly." As far as I know, the Anns story is apocryphal, or that's what I've always heard. rodii 21:05, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I went back to the "Pictorial history of Ann Arbor" through the AADL website and there are many accounts concerning the origin of the city's name. Hence, I reworded according. Also, I moved the AADL Ann Arbor history website link into references. Pentawing 05:35, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Pentawing, you rock. You are indefatigable. rodii 14:58, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: I wanted to do some editing but at the last minute felt like I should ask here first, specifically about the idiosyncratic use of – on this page. Normally there are three distinct uses of dash-like objects:
*Hyphens in phrases like Michigan-based or student-run
*en-dashes (–) to indicate ranges, usually of numbers (1968–1990, 1990–present)
*em-dashes (—) as sentence punctuation similar to parentheses or commas (the Ann Arbor Observer—a monthly magazine with features covering local culture, politics, family life, business and history)
We seem to have en-dashes kind of willy-nilly all over the place, often with a space before and after. My take on it is that many of those should be em-dashes, and that the space before and after is unusual (more common in the Commonwealth than in the US though). But I don't want to change them and run afoul of some wikipedia standard style I'm unaware of. I know this is insanely picky, but hey. rodii 18:00, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I seem to have caused a real firestorm with that one. :) rodii 02:05, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  &amp;ndash; usage 

message: Flint Ink, alas, is no longer privately or locally owned. I made changes in the Economy section to reflect that, but one might question whether it's still worthy of inclusion. I would vote yes just because it's still a big, well-known operation locally, but YMMV. rodii 14:58, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Economy 

message: The city has more public radio broadcasters available on its airwaves than any other U.S. listening area, including NPR affiliates from Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti, East Lansing, Detroit and Toledo, and a CBC affiliate from Windsor, Ontario.
That CBC link needs to be more specific: is it CBC Television? CBC Radio One? CBC Radio Two? Could someone who knows the city clarify which of the CBC services are or aren't available in Ann Arbor? Bearcat 01:34, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The passage focuses on public radio, so I only focused on the CBC radio stations and noted them. Pentawing 02:15, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Media

message: Bhuck put this in a comment--I'm moving it here: This is a problem, as there are TWO nicknameS, but only the singular term "nickname" appears instead of the plural "nicknames"
I don't think this is a problem--just read that comma as "or".  rodii 15:28, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment moved from main article 

message: *Several other articles about urban areas have a landmarks section. I think this is a great idea for Ann Arbor, a city with so many notable landmarks (the Rock, Michigan Stadium, etc.)
**Could work, as long as it is not inserted as a list. Pentawing 22:41, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Landmarks

message: Is there really any of this left? The original article text was "Ann Arbor is the county seat of Washtenaw County, Michigan. It is the home of the University of Michigan." If this is the EB text I think it's worth considering it superseded.
:The 1911 EB text is a bit longer than that, but only consists of one very dated paragraph. Some information about the founding and incorporation dates, and the gist of the initial sentence, is all that seems to remain. I agree the 1911 EB tag was no longer needed. -- Avenue 02:41, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica

message: I'm too lazy to go to the library right now, but I'm sure there's an interesting story behind Ann Arbor's reforestation campaign -- most of the city was clear-cut by 1900, I think, so the famous trees are almost all new(ish).  Tlogmer 21:30, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Reforestation

message: A bunch of new material has been added that folks should take a look at. I think it's overdetailed in places and hard to read. I edited it down a bit and reverted the section on transportation, since there was some misinformation (the AATA doesn't go to Chelsea) and some IMO needless detail mentioning every township the routes travel to). I would have edited more, but I don't want to step on someone else's work too summmarily. If other people could pass their eyes over the edits (mine and the previous one), though, that would be great. The article is already over-long and I think we have to be careful about adding avalanches of detail on minor points. I'm particularly interested in your reaction to the sections on commercial areas and climate. Too much? rodii 17:04, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: New edit by 207.200.116.12 

message: What needs to be confirmed, the existence of the song or the claim that it's the "unofficial anthem" of Ann Arbor? The song is real () but I have nothing to say about its anthem status. It was very popular around town in the 80s and 90s. rodii 01:21, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Angelo's 

message: OK, we've had a little back and forth over including arborupdate and annarborisoverrated in the Media section. I deleted a little passage on it, which has been partially restored, so... lets discuss. My feeling is that we have those sites listed in External Links, and there's really nothing much to say about them besides "they exist", so they don't really need any special mention in the main article. The article is pretty long and (I think) should only be added to for good reason, so I'm inclined to delete that passage (but I won't). What do others think? Here's the passage:
*(first version) "In 2004, a group of bloggers, journalists, activists founded ArborUpdate.com, a blog dedicated to news coverage of the Ann Arbor area. Another widely read blog in the city is AnnArborIsOverrated.com."
*(second version) "In 2004, a group of bloggers and journalists founded ArborUpdate.com, a website devoted to news coverage of the Ann Arbor area."
I have no problem with the sites, by the way--I like both. Just thinking about what's good in the article. --rodii 02:52, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My take is to place both in the "External links" section (which I already did). PentawingTalk 05:43, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Hey Murph, good to hear from you. Yeah, it seemed like that person was really focused on getting that one site added, rather than filling in the big picture of the "online tradition." There's no question in my mind of the worthiness of arborupdate as a voice in the community, it's just that there wasn't a lot of value created by that one sentence, and the anon editor seemed to be unaware that it was already linked in the article. But now that you've pointed it out, I think that your suggestion would be a great direction to go in. It might be worth pointing out to your correspondent that Wikipedia has a big problem right now with spam, vanity, and people intent on pushing very particular points of view without doing any listening to the rest of the community, and simply taking part in the discussion would probably have made the issue go away. So... good suggestions, and thanks. I hope commonmonkeyflower comes back to life soon! —rodii 23:26, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blogs in media 

message: I'm not sure I see the logic behind putting most of the people articles formerly under the Ann Arbor category into the new Ann Arborites category, but leaving a few of them (i.e. Andrew W.K., John Sinclair (poet), etc.) under the Ann Arbor category. Is this just an oversight, or is there a method behind this? Also, is it correct to put people under the Ann Arborites category if (as with W.K. and Sinclair) they once lived in Ann Arbor but no longer do? Thanks for any thoughts on this. Ropcat 23:54, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Some of the names were oversights, though I would prefer all articles relating to people from Ann Arbor to be moved over to that category (for better organization). As for people for once lived in Ann Arbor but no longer do, I don't see why they should be placed in any Ann Arbor categories in the first place, unless they did something significant while residing in the Ann Arbor area. PentawingTalk 01:38, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ann Arbor versus Ann Arborites cats 

message: User 68.24.1.8 has added a lot of detail to "Education" that seems unnecessary. For instance, "The public schools offer a wide curriculum including enrichment courses such as band/orchestra, theater and dance, advanced placement courses and tests to earn college credit." Or that pre-school is offered. I'm not sure that we need this level of detail, and 'particularly' details that are so generic (after all, most districts of Ann Arbor's size offer "band/orchestra," et al.). I don't think this stuff adds much to the article, especially since very little is a notable or unusual facet of the AAPS. Do people agree that we can compress or eliminate most of the recent "Education" additions? Ropcat 02:07, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I eliminated much of the extracurricular activities since this information also applies to other school districts within the U.S. (personally, I can't see why these items are worth mentioninig in this article, unless one of the activities is nationally known for a period of time). PentawingTalk 02:53, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Hi Bad Dog. I agree entirely with you about the MEAP testing; there's no reason to have that on the main Ann Arbor article. I also appreciate your addition of the third alternative high school. I wasn't trying to be too critical; I think there were some nice additions that you made in there. Thanks for taking part in the discussion. Ropcat 08:16, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I support the removal. It also seemed kind of randomly inserted into the middle of the schools discussion. —rodii 12:40, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Agreed. Thanks, Bad Dog. Ropcat 00:11, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Education 

message: I don't want to just wade in and start deleting, because I appreciate the work that went into those graphs, but they're not working for me. First, I think the statistics they're presenting are trivial enough that they don't need graphs--they're just a simple comparison of Ann Arbor against national benchmarks; the data tables themselves are included in the charts and they work just fine on their own. Second, the 3-D nature of the charts distorts their values and is mostly chartjunk. Simple bar graphs would be better; adding 3-D junk and using pie charts at all is just not effective. (For the record, I teach this stuff for a living.) Third, this article is already quite long, and I think we need to watch oout about adding things just for the sake of having facts in there. If this info could be done as a summary table, great; as it is, it just adds more complexity to an already unwieldy article.
But like I say, I appreciate the work that BadDog has done here and I don't want to be a lone gunman, so I thought I'd put this out there. —rodii 15:02, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm glad the statistics were dug up, especially since we wanted a crime section. But couldn't they just be presented in prose? (A sentence on major crime events, like the John Norman Collins crimes of the late 1960s, might or might not be appropriate for this section, too.) Ropcat 18:22, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm still not crazy about them—I just don't think there's enough there to warrant graphs—but eh. I started redoing them as a table, but ran out of time. If I can't supply anything better, I can't really complain. I will note one of the problems with providing information in this format, though: "burglary" is misspelled "burglery," and the fact that it's an image means editors can't fix it. —rodii 13:15, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree (about providing graphs in image format). Sorry if this sounds ungrateful, but providing the graphs only as an image seems to violate at least the spirit of the GFDL, which we agree to when we contribute. It says a "transparent" (i.e. easily modifiable) version should be provided. -- Avenue 14:45, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I provided the images in SVG format, which is editable in a text editor.  Still, I'll fix the spelling; sorry about that. Tlogmer 23:17, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

text: BadDog, sorry if I offended you by pointing to the marijuana/Ann Arbor article. No offense intended. Regarding whether the "$5 pot law" should be in this article: we could make it more explicit if you think it's a good idea. Right now there are two passages that allude to it: 1.) In "History": ...successfully fought for measures ranging from pioneering antidiscrimination ordinances to measures decriminalizing marijuana possession...; and 2.) In "Government and Politics": ...voter-approved charter amendments that have lessened the penalties for possession of marijuana (1974)... But if you want to mention it elsewhere, or more explicitly, it's fine with me. Ropcat 17:49, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Excel graphs 

message: What about a category listing Noted Residents - Past and Present?  An article on Ann Arbor without mentioning the name of Bob Seger doesn't seem complete.
Also, in the category of Culture, the Gerald Ford Presidential Library is mentioned as being in Ann Arbor.  I thought it was in Grand Rapids.  At least it was when I visited there in 1997.  Did it move in the last 9 years or is someone full of you know what here? Hokeman 16:49, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Gerald Ford Presidential Library is in Ann Arbor.  The Gerald Ford Presidential Museum is in Grand Rapids.  It is, I think, the only presidential history institution which is located in two different cities.  There was some discussion about this when C-SPAN convened all the presidential library directors to chat about their work. Kestenbaum 19:51, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In terms of notable people, I would suggest creating a separate article and linking it from this under under a "See also" category. The article loses its stability if we create a list in the main article. Speaking of which, can anyone list some notable people here in the talk page so that one of us can start that separate article? Thanks. PentawingTalk 23:33, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, a notable people list is an invitation for everyone to get their favorite person in, or out. Destabilizing is a good way of describing it. (Starting a list below.) · rodii · 03:53, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, the list has been started in a new article. PentawingTalk 22:33, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improvements & Corrections 

message: Substituted at 20:10, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment