Talk:Louisville, Kentucky/Archive 4

message: Since the Census Bureau has clearly defined the new Louisville as only the old city and unincorporated areas, I think there some details needed that need to be added defining Metro Government. First, it is important  to note that a KY Legislative bill (dubbed the Lyndon Bill} prohibits suburban cities from annexing more land. If this were not the case then the unincorp. areas could create their own government and only the old city would again be left.  Second, this definition won't effect the new city's population growth, since nearly all growth is in the unicorpirated areas and nearly all suburban cities are having very slow growth or even populatiuon losses. Third, even if Suburban cities don't count toward the population, their residents can still vote for Metro mayor and council members, and will still receive Metrowide help in such areas as urban planning and emergency services.
:Personally, I think the official municipality (the entire county) is what should make up this article, regardless of what the Census Bureau says. The smaller article with the "balance" is what should have the information for the census-defined city. CrazyC83 01:31, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Your ideas of what the census bureau has defined are not correct. What you are referring to is the Louisville-Jefferson County balance, which is not the same thing as consolidated Louisville-Jefferson County. Both are defined separately by the Census Bureau (see here). This article is about the consolidated Louisville-Jefferson County (which is how the city is legally incorporated). The confusion lies in the Census Bureau's use of balance figures when ranking cities, rather than the consolidated figures. (Although even this use is inconsistant as they seem to use the full consolidated figures for the decennial rankings.) Kaldari 05:04, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

text: The Census Bureau has accepted the Louisville/ Jefferson balance, but not the City/County Consolidation, which is why the suburban populations are not counted in its estimates and won't be in future censuses. Because of the acceptence of the Lou/Jef Balance, my points should be brought up about the ban on suburban city annexation. If this were not the case then the Balance could be quickly eaten up by the suburbs.
Your assertion is not entirely correct. The Census Bureau does, in fact, include the entire consolidated Louisville-Jefferson County in their estimates. They also include a separate figure for the balance:
 170,Louisville/Jefferson County,Kentucky,A,693604,693872,694757,695843,698059,698903,699827
 162,Louisville/Jefferson County (balance),Kentucky,A,551183,551390,552058,552828,554381,555366,556429
That's from the 2005 estimates (the last number is the 2005 estimated population). This article is not about the balance, however. Issues involving the balance should be discussed on the balance article's talk page. Kaldari 15:46, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: New Louisville definition

message: There are too many disputes about the population of the actual city proper. According to the Census bureau estimates, the balance population is 556,429 and not anywhere near 700,000. What is the actual city proper population, as that is to be what is listed? I do not believe that Louisville has a population anywhere near that of Columbus, Ohio. We need to decide the official population of the city proper and correct any and all inaccurate statements regarding the actual population. There are several pages in Wikipedia listing the population as 699,000 (or so), when the Census lists the population as 556,429. I understand that several people (especially those who live in the area) want the population figure to be high so the city can reach a higher status. If it was a city I lived in, I would like to do the same. However, that cannot be done here. An actual, correct population for the city proper and the metro needs to be listed. If we are able to, we need to come up with the balance population of the counties and the actual city. I am a little confused myself, and I did not want to attempt to change anything before it is discussed. Ajwebb 21:21, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There have been many people who have debated this over and over again and we have come to the consensus that is now demonstrated in the article.  Please, for the sake of your own knowledge, read all the talk archives that cover this situation.  Since there is a consensus that's currently overwhelmingly not in your favor, you might want to do that research before thinking about flaming things up. —  Stevie is the man!  Talk | Work 21:29, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you that a comprmise had been reached but please, tone down your anger. --Moreau36 21:46, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Who's angry?  I suppose "direct and to the point" equals angry?  How about toning down your oversensitivity? —  Stevie is the man!  Talk | Work 03:48, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree that more could be added to the "Government and politics" section covering major changes due to the merger.  The article already mentions City of Parks using a contextual wikilink.  I guess as long as the material merits encyclopedia-level coverage, it should be added.  Perhaps we could even end up with a separate Government of Louisville, Kentucky article someday. —  Stevie is the man!  Talk | Work 03:54, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Actual Population 

message: Looking at the progression of other city articles, I think it's becoming somewhat of a de facto standard for the Demographics section to be in its own section, and not groups with People and Culture. So I separated this out, and created a new section called 'Culture', with the other information from People and Culture going there. I also promoted the 'economy' section to be ahead of the 'culture' section, based on what appears in other articles as well. Dr. Cash 21:39, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks acceptable to me.  Thanks! Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 21:55, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

text: That's in line with what's suggested at WP:CITY I think, so it seems okay with me. --W.marsh 23:03, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: minor change to section heirarchy

message: According to this Washington Post article and List of United States cities by population, Louisville (balance) now ranks 27 with regards to 2005 U.S. Census figures.  I will be updating the article to reflect this.  Thanks. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 15:42, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Louisville (balance) slips to 27 in ranking 

message: In the segment describing the creation of the Hot Brown, it also is mentioned that the Brown Hotel had a back room popular with Al Capone. This back room was at the Seelbach's Oak Room, not at the Brown. One can verify this via the hotel's website(www.seelbachhilton.com/history_celebrities.html) or via a simple Google search as a number of newspaper stories have been devoted to it over the years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.123.86.203 (talk • contribs) 
:I just made an attempt at correcting the article.  Thank you for letting us know about the error. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 21:29, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusion of Sealbach and Brown 

message: My almanac stated the the smallest city in the US / World is (among others) New Amsterdam, Indiana, located in southern Harrison County. It has a population of 1 has of 2000. This might be an interesting tidbit for the page. 
Also, it may be worth noting that when the Fort Knox troop population loss is not considered, Hardin COunty was one of the fastest growing KY counties, & the Lou CSA added 125K people, not 114K in the 90s in non military residents. 4.225.116.88 01:59, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: New Amsterdam could be covered in Harrison County, Indiana and Louisville-Jefferson County, KY-IN Metropolitan Statistical Area.  The Hardin County info could be covered in Hardin County, Kentucky.  And additional information about CSA population changes could be covered in Louisville-Elizabethtown-Scottsburg, KY-IN Combined Statistical Area. Hope that  helps. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 21:44, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Not sure how accurate that population total is though...  --W.marsh 01:25, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  World's smallest city in Lou. Metro? 

message: I UL-d the tv and radio stations 'cause they were a mess. However, some of the details may have been muddied (more than they were). Wake 00:55, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for wanting to clean up this material.  However, I fear the article could be risking its featured status if this information isn't in prose form.  If my fear is overly heightened, somebody else please add your two cents.  I personally don't mind having a couple lists, but I have to be concerned about maintaining the status of the article.  Thanks. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 01:31, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I wonder if this should be relegated to a List of Radio Stations in Lou. KY page. I agree that the list looks bad, but reformatting the data doesn't change its nature. I think it's too much detail for a page like this. If I'm going to be this involved I should join the group 8). Wake 20:11, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to join us at the Louisville Wikiproject.  I wonder if maybe both TV   and Radio stations need to be on a separate Media of Louisville, Kentucky page, and maybe just mention 840 WHAS and WAVE 3 on the main page, as WHAS is a "legacy station" and Wave 3 was Kentucky's first TV channel.--Bedford 20:38, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Bedford, looks like you've done it! That cleans up the main page nicely. I did join the group. Wake 03:02, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree with your ideas for creating a separate article and only discussing the most prominent media examples in this article.  Either approach ("List of" or "Media of") works for me. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 21:29, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Media 

message: Can anyone find a source for this statement?  First of all, it's nebulous in that it could either mean historically, recently, or this year, and also, watched by who? (television viewers? track visitors?). Since this is a featured article, I think we need to come up with a source very soon, or this clause should be removed. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 14:20, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm going to go ahead and remove this blurb from the article.  A claim like this really does need to have much better precision and be sourced adequately. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 16:44, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I actually rewrote it, as it is indeed widely watched, but saying it is the most widely watched isn't acceptable without precision and a source. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 16:55, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "the most widely watched event in American horse racing" 

message: Elizabethtown is an important city in it's own right. Way do you try to include Elizabethtown's attributes in an article about Louisville? Stating that Fort Knox and the Patton Museum is "nearby" when in fact it is over an hours drive away. I modified the statement to reflect that, and you revert it. Power-tripping and homerism at it's worse. This statement needsto be removed all together(which I will do if you don't allow the modification, I'm trying to be nice) or allow it to be noted that it is some distance away in another major city.
:Fort Knox is largely in the Louisville metropolitan area.  In fact, Elizabethtown is in the Louisville CSA.  It might behoove you to look up facts before making accusations. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 04:19, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Further, the Bullion Depository and Patton Museum are absolutely not in E-town.  I live in the Louisville area, and I know this stuff. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 04:25, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've been by it numerous times and can vouch for this. Looking at a map, Elizabethtown does not come close to the Bullion Depository or the Patton Museum. Let's get the facts straight.  Seicer (talk) (contribs) 04:26, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

text: It may behoove you to learn about the concept of a metropolitan area. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 05:30, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Elizabethtown

message: I've counted 67 and whenever I cite this with a  for later use and/or hoping others will help me with the citing, it is removed by "stevies is the woman!". Is Louiville article exempt from Wikipedia policy?  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.35.237.67 (talk • contribs) .
Will cite the mentioned later tonight. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.35.237.67 (talk • contribs) .
Also, the Louisville article exeeds policy length. Needs to be edited down. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.35.237.67 (talk • contribs) .
:Your personal attacks, plus your insertion of infactual material, plus content removal, plus indicating that you will keep doing damage to various articles, means that, at some point, admins will be dealing with this matter. Thank you. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 05:43, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please read WP:SIG  Seicer (talk) (contribs) 11:48, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uncited Statements of Fact in Louisville Article 

message: They are operated by TARC. They are not free, except for the first Friday of every month for Gallery Hop IIRC.    Seicer (talk) (contribs) 03:00, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also     Seicer (talk) (contribs) 03:01, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trolley System 

message: Is there any thought of expanding the Sister Cities section?  I created the category earlier today.--Bedford 22:49, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sister Cities 

message: The statistics are off, I think, in the religion section on Catholics. According to the Archdiocese, there are 122 parishes in the whole archdiocese, which stretchs all the way to Tennesee. The source quoted seems less authoratative than the archdiocese itself, plus because much of the archdiocese is outside of Louisville, even outside of Louisville Metro, none of the statistics are very useful. I found my statistics are http://www.archlou.org/archlou/statistics Rjstultz 22:19, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Catholic statistics 

message: The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
*Per WP:MOS, avoid using words/phrases that indicate time periods relative to the current day.  See footnote
*Per WP:MOSNUM, there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 18mm, use 18 mm, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 18 mm.See footnote
*Per WP:CONTEXT and WP:BTW, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006, but do not link January 2006.
*Please reorder/rename the last few sections to follow guidelines at WP:GTL. 
*Please alphabetize the interlanguage links.See footnote
*Per WP:WIAFA, this article's table of contents (ToC) maybe too long- consider shrinking it down by merging short sections or using a proper system of daughter pages as per WP:SS.See footnote
* article may need to undergo summary style, where a series of appropriate subpages are used. For example, if the article is United States, than an appropriate subpage would be History of the United States, such that a summary of the subpage exists on the mother article, while the subpage goes into more detail. 
*There are a few occurrences of weasel words in this article- please observe WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view.  See footnote 
*Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
**While additive terms like “also”, “in addition”, “additionally”, “moreover”, and “furthermore” may sometimes be useful, overusing them when they aren't necessary can instead detract from the brilliancy of the article. This article has 62 additive terms, a bit too much.
**Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant -  “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
**Temporal terms like “over the years”, “currently”, “now”, and “from time to time” often are too vague to be useful, but occasionally may be helpful. “I am now using a semi-bot to generate your peer review.”
*Please provide citations for all of the s.
*Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that the it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 2a. See footnote
You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, W.marsh 02:34, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Automated peer review 

message: Will Louisville be one of the only US cities w/ a Jewish mayor & Jewish Representative? 
136.165.88.39 16:08, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: If Yarmuth wins...