Talk:New York City/Archive 7

message: Comparisons of NYC economy to India's and Canada's was faulty. Incase of India and China we do not use Real exchange rates to describe productivity, thus India's economy adjusted by PPP is over 3 times larger than that of NYC, and Canada's economy is nearly 200 billion$ larger as well, thus is rather pointless to compare such a disperate amount and call it slight. Perhaps comparing it to that of Spain, or the city of Tokyo's economy -which is considerably larger than New Yorks, however is also a global economic city- would be more relevant.
:Other nations use nominal GDP exchange rate for comparison, not PPP. For example, look up Paris. I don't see what the big deal is, so what if it's bigger than India's and almost the same size as Canada's. --Rotten 05:49, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Some edits

message: I moved all the comments to Talk:New York City/Archive 6 and started this new page. Wv235 01:46, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Archived comments

message: This article has undergone a lot of work and is close to feature status. It was nominated once before and failed. The main objection was that the article was not comprehensive enough. Secondary objections were about POV and poor writing. After major edits and additions, if anything the article is now too comprehensive at 60+ kbs. I believe the POV and poor writing issues have been corrected.
It's time to revisit a feature status nomination. Before a nomination takes place the article should be subjected to rigorous peer review. There should also be a discussion of what to trim to get the article down to a more reasonable size -- we can't do 30kbs, but 50 is within reach. I propose cutting the "skyline" section and making it part of a new daughter article on New York City architecture. Thoughts? Wv235 02:03, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure. That sounds reasonable to me. Uris  23:34, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Preparing for feature status

message: I would take exception to the quote "The city is widely regarded as the financial capital of the world" although the qualification is admirable it doesn't seem to be substanciated indeed as more dollars are traded per day in London than New York. Painful to swallow but true. If this could perhaps be substanciated forthwidth I shall be happy to revoke my editing and indeed would be much obliged. New York is indeed a richer city but does wealth alone determine a financial pedigree? If so is not California the financial capital as it is the 5th richest country in the world in it's own right. some consistancy and uniform standards should perhaps be applied to this claim to bring it in line with the excellent standard usually displayed by this community. Thank you Rob15v August 2006
The claim to financial capital of the world is because the amount of financial transactions taking place with the city was more then anywhere else.  It has nothing to do with the stock exchange, per capital income etc.  167.153.10.138 21:38, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Finacial Claim

message: Twice on the page (in the table and in the text) it says that the city is 27% black. Later in the article, it says that the city is 11.5% African American. Which is correct? Or do the terms not correspond exactly to each other? Uris  22:26, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Accurate Demographics

message: A list of cinemas in new york city should be added.  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 141.153.205.86 (talk • contribs) .
:I disagree, the list would be too long for a top level article.  Feel free to create an article like List of theaters in New York City however. -Quasipalm 15:10, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cinemas

message: It's been a while since I visited this article and, in my opinion, the photos are much weaker now.  It's much more like a glossy travel brochure rather than an accurate view of what the city is like.  I like the subway photo, but why take out the photo of people on Fifth Avenue that shows some diversity?  Why add a photo of a Dutch painting just because it's in a museum (why not illustrate the Art section with a New York artist like Warhol or Haring?)  Why take out the Outer Borough photos, like the one taken in Jackson Heights?  At one point, we took great care to ensure that all the photos weren't just taken in Manhattan; now, again, they all are.  The buildings are all precious here, the people almost uniformly white (with the exception of the subway photo), and the street musician photo  looks posed. 
The idea of Wikipedia is to show things as they are.  The article now looks like some kind of travel-agency view of New York: sort of stilted, too highbrow, and duller than the city deserves.  Thoughts?Moncrief 23:39, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I dunno, I see people of color in the Times Square, Central Park, Grand Central and Stock Exchange images.  Nevertheless, I agree that there should be images from the outer boros.  The article seems to have been hijacked by Manhattanites (of course, the city has been, too). -- Mwanner | Talk 00:06, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I know it's still Manhattan, but for the "art" image, I would like to see something of Harlem, such as the Apollo Theater, given it's major significance in NYC's (and African-American, and simply American) cultural heritage.  I don't yet see any good photo here that fits the bill, though. -Aude (talk | contribs) 00:47, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I don't think this is that serious of a concern.  For one, all city pags have more images of the urban core parts of the city than they do outer neighborhoods (see LA for an example).  Also, there are just a ton more images of Manhattan on the commons to choose from -- so we need to take more pics of outer boroughs.  I don't think it's about manhattanites taking over the page. -Quasipalm 03:33, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the point was that there were more images from the outer boroughs that are now gone.  I agree that the Jackson Heights photo should still be there. -69.86.137.250 16:16, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Great decisions, Jleon.  Thanks! Moncrief 18:21, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Photos much worse now

message: The Former FAC directs to the current one, I don't know whether it was added early or there was another nomination, or what happened as this is my first time seeing this article. Could someone clarify this? SandBoxer 00:54, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Former FAC? 

message: Why is there no archive 1?? Georgia guy 13:36, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archive 1 

message: I notice that the flag looks like it's based on the French flag. Anyone who knows anything feel like starting an article on the New York City flag? Note that there is already an article on the state flag - not the same flag at all. Stevage 22:11, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok - I made a start.  All of my info comes from a single source though, linked on the page. Carlo 22:31, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

text: UPDATE: I just discovered that a page already existed under "Flag of New York City" and merged some of what I just did into that. Carlo 23:23, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request: article on New York City flag 

message: Both the Queens and Brooklyn entries of the 'Boroughs and Neighborhoods' section state that each borough is the most ethnically diverse in the nation. They can't both be. I've heard Queens said more often, but can anyone come up with statistics to back this up? --Sky 01:11, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've typically seen "diversity" defined as the number of different cultures contained within the borough, regardless of percentages, or the number of languages spoken in the borough. I believe that, going by both of those definitions, Queens trumps Brooklyn, but let's take a look at that census. Ferrantino 01:27, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which is it? 

message: The census figure for land area (in the infobox) is different from the NYC government figure in the intro text (303 vs. 321 sq. mi). One figure should be chosen for consistency. Reference 4 refers to outdated definitions (CMSA, PMSA). This text should be updated. Polaron | Talk 16:14, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  comments on population and land area 

message: The Education section begins with this sentence:
:"The City University of New York (CUNY) is, with over 400,000 students, the third-largest university system in the United States. It has been called 'the poor man's Harvard' because of its low tuition and record of graduating the highest number of Nobel Laureates of any public university in the world."
Technically only one CUNY campus, City College -- often called CCNY and known formally as the College of the City of New York -- is called "the poor man's Harvard."  CCNY's total of nine alumni Nobelists places it first only among American public universities, not worldwide, and only in terms of undergraduate alumni; many alumni of graduate programs at the University of Califronia at Berkeley (along with several former undergrads) have won Nobels, and Cambridge University in the United Kingdom is also public and has graduated dozens of Nobelists.  I believe one or two Nobel winners graduated from other divisions of CUNY, but comparing the entire CUNY system to single campuses of other systems makes little sense.  The undergraduate and graduate programs of the University of California system have produced far more laureates than CUNY.
::I haven't heard any CUNY called a "poor man's Harvard", but I have heard the system as a whole described along the lines of a public Ivy League.  — AnnaKucsma   (Talk to me!) 13:41, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  City University (CUNY) Discussion 

message: I checked yesterday and it seemed to be a good size, and a resonable amount of chapters, but today I found it was extended...what happend?
*Jack, please stop harassing on other articles. You are causing a nuisance wherever you go. That said, if you want to know who made changes, there is a perfectly good history tool available to you. Use it. Diliff   | (Talk)   (Contribs) 10:33, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who made this article longer 

message: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/United States
Cast your vote! The more responses, the more chances the article will improve and maybe pass the nomination.--Ryz05 t 02:24, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[United States]] article on featured candidate nominations list 

message: A user helpfully added "Gotham City" as a nickname for NYC. Unfortunately, this is incorrect. Gotham City is a fictional city based on NYC; New York City is simply called "Gotham." Apparently, Washington Irving first gave it this nickname, for reasons which were probably funnier back when he wrote it. See this information at the Gotham Center, which also has a nice discussion of the "Big Apple" moniker. Best, Docether 17:20, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: DragoonWraith 14:25, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Also known as ... (redux) 

message: The elevation figure is questionable.  It's clearly not the lowest point in the city (which would be sea level).  I'm sure it's not the highest either.  Maybe it's the average, but by what authority, I have no idea.  I found one citation  that disagrees with the figure we have, but it's hardly authoritative either.  -- RoySmith (talk) 17:36, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Elevation 

message: The introductory paragraphs to the culture section belong more properly with demography. I don't want to do it now, because it would be a substantial change, but would anyone object to trying to move those into the demography section, and perhaps streamline it a little bit (e.g. move most of the figures to sidebars, and try to improve the flow of the main text)? –Joke 14:26, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Since nobody objected, I went ahead and did this. Most city pages seem to have some kind of "Culture" section, but I couldn't find style guide that suggested this should be standard. What was there was utter fluff, and I don't think the article is any worse for its absence. –Joke 17:03, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Demography/Culture 

message: Hello! Sport is actually more of a culture thing, therefor it should be a sub-section under "culture". Jackp 15:45, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sport 

message: The first line read "New York City is the most populous...".   However, "populous" means:  "containing many people or habitants, having a large population."  Therefore the line didn't really make sense with "most" in front of "populous"... what would one mean by saying "New York City is the most containing a large population"?  What is meant is that the city is the most "populated" not the most "populous."   Alternatively, one could say that New York City is populous - not that it is the most populous.  So anyway I made the edit.  Gacggt 12:34, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: First Line

message: The demographic table used to be New York City compared to New York State and the United States. I thought this table was more interesting than the comparison to LA and Chicago, so I went through the census data and corrected all the numbers in the old table. For simplicity and consistency, I used the 2000 census throughout, without projections to 2004 or 2005. Some miscreant had gone through and systematically vandalized the old table, so for future reference I am posting a link to the correct version here . I also inserted these rows into the table in Demographics of New York City. –Joke 16:16, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Demographic table 

message: I tried to do some work on the article, copyediting, shortening it in places, improving the flow, and adding information which I thought was missing (like, that Time Warner has its headquarters in NYC!). I think I made some pretty drastic removals from the demographics section, but it is hard to make "New York has a lot of X socio-cultural-ethnic population. New York has a lot of Y socio-cultural-ethnic population. New York has a lot of Z socio-cultural-ethnic population." flow together smoothly, so I thought these things might be better covered in detail in the seperate article on demographics, which could use a lot of work.
I also added a link to gothamist, which is quite a popular New York city blog, and is quite useful for current events about the city. It is borderline linkspam, so remove it if you feel it is inappropriate. 
Anyways, I think we should think about nominating the article for featured status (again) sometime soon. I think the referencing is dramatically improving (n.b. I did add several fact templates where I thought improvements were needed). While people are still likely to raise the objection that it is too long, there isn't much that could easily be trimmed away from the article, and I think individual sections are punchy and succinct. –Joke 22:56, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a good point, although the Times Square photo was more the back of someone's head. To be honest, a photo that it really pained me to remove was the photo of the Union Square Greenmarket. So I put it back in. The problem with the images in the article, as I see it, is not that there are too many, but that some sections are more suited to interesting photos and thus have too many (cityscape, tourism and recreation, transport). I was hoping that someone would see my comments above and upload a nice image of Jackson Heights, or something, but I can't find anything. –Joke 02:22, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, I decided to move the Unisphere into diversity where it obliterated the Statue of Liberty. This helped to free up room in Cityscape. It also gave some space to mention that Queens is pretty darn diverse. –Joke 02:40, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured status? 

message: I just rewrote the sports section in response to comments on the featured article candidates page. I have two requests:
# Can people read it to make sure it sounds reasonable?
# I said that baseball is New York's "first" sport. This sounds obvious to me, but if someone could find a good citation, I would appreciate it. I imagine that baseball is probably still the most popular sport in NYC, and historically it has only gotten less popular as other sports have made inroads so it should be possible to find comparative stadium attendance or TV numbers for the various sports or something like that.
Thanks. –Joke 02:06, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sports 

message: Two unique aspects of NYC have occured to me that might merit a mention in the article, although there is no logical place for them:
* New York's housing issues, and in particular its elaborate systems of rent control and rent stabilization.
* Power generation in NYC, in particular the beloved Consolidated Edison company and the state-mandated requirement that 80% of the city's electricity be generated in the five boroughs.
Comments? –Joke 02:17, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two things 

message: I noticed in History that the city is stated as having been populated by Lenape when it was discovered by Verrazzano. This word choice (discovery) seems innacurate, as the area was already inhabited. But I'm having trouble thinking of a good rewording. --Natalie 16:45, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  discovery? 

message: Regarding concerns raised about the article's length on the Featured Article nomination, India is a featured article on an entire country that has compelling prose, is comprehensive and at 37 KB, is concise as well. --Jtalledo (talk) 00:19, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I managed to trim it from 64 to 57 kb. That's progress, but I doubt I could get it to 50, much less 37. –Joke 03:00, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't need to be that small. The citation, prose and organization issues were probably bigger issues of contention, and those issues seem to be better addressed now. --Jtalledo (talk) 03:11, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Length 

message: "New York City is a center for business, finance, fashion, medicine, entertainment, media and culture, with an extraordinary collection of museums, galleries and performance spaces."
That sentance seems to be a "peacock" term. And the sentance is saying it's just a "center" for those things, if it's an international center for those things, then I guess it could be left in but otherwise it has no buisiness being there. Jackp 07:16, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Uh, I don't really know how to respond. I agree that by avoid peacock terms, this applies. However, trying to indicate why each one is true would take up too much space. Do you seriously doubt any element of this sentence? –Joke 13:33, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

text: New York City isn't a center of fashion? New York doesn't have performance spaces? Excuse me? --Larry V (talk | contribs) 12:57, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

text: "Center" is not a peacock term, so that part of the sentence is fine.  "Extraordinary" is however, and that part of the sentence could be changed to something more fact-based, like, "with the largest collection of museums, galleries and performance spaces in the nation." or something similar. -Quasipalm 13:19, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Jackp, we know you're a big fan of Sydney , but please don't try to argue that NYC is not a center of culture and arts. One doesn't need to provide a citation for something that is common knowledge and that a reasonable person would not dispute. --MichaelZimmer (talk) 14:30, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Not a center of culture? Please explain. --Larry V (talk | contribs) 13:07, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Even though Pedro is almost certainly running afoul of WP:POINT here, I'll respond as if he weren't. Per the culture Wikipedia article, "culture has been called 'the way of life for an entire society.' As such, it includes codes of manners, dress, language, religion, rituals, norms of behaviour and systems of belief." NYC is certainly a cultural center. Primarily, it is a center of American culture, though the diversity of cultures within the city have also made it an "expatriate" hotbed of cultural trends in non-American cultures as well. Within the US, trends in manners, dress, language, etc. consistently appear first in NYC before flowing to the rest of the country. Not always, of course (off the top of my head, I'd say that trends in 21st century American religion have so far been underrepresented in NYC), but consistently. Similarly, these trends in (primarily American) culture are frequently disseminated from NYC to the rest of the world in a manner equalled only by those other cities commonly considered "cultural centers" of the world. Throughout the 20th and 21st centuries, commentators and writers too numerous to count have consistently identified NYC as one of the major cultural centers in the US. So -- Pedro's contention that NYC is not a cultural center is unfortunately not in line with the rest of Wikipedia's articles on cultural matters. It is both a center for culture within the US and for American culture worldwide. -- Best, Docether 13:30, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I think it would be highly-POV to say that NYC is not a cultural center. That would probably require a bit of anti-NYC sentiment. --Larry V (talk | contribs) 02:15, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  BTW, Jackp has been indefinitely blocked from Wikipedia. -Quasipalm 17:34, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

text: So, the only two places responsible for culture on the planet are two European cities? --MichaelZimmer (talk) 21:57, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think the problem is so much the word "culture" as "center." The words "culture" and "center" are both being misunderstood here, but I will focus on "center." Athens and Rome are certainly two of the origins of culture for the entire Western world—no doubt about that. If you trace Western culture back in time, those two cities are probably as close to the epicenter as one can get. However, does that mean that culture has not collected in other locations by the present day? In addition, the statement that Athens and Rome are the only two cultural centers of the world—or even points of origin for culture—completely ignores the immensely rich and influential culture that emerged from the Far East, which for thousands of years did not involve Europe at all. --Larry V (talk | contribs) 22:11, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Centre? 

message: According to this site I came across, NY still has the capital punishment existing: http://www.geocities.com/trctl11/state.html As far as I know the state abolished capital punishment for all crimes in 2004? Can anyone clarify if the city still has CP? If not, then they're the 13th state in the union to fully abolish capital punishment and should thus the page on CP in the USA be adapted.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 170.65.192.6 (talk • contribs) .
:According to this , the state legislature decided not to reinstate the death penalty in April 2005. --MichaelZimmer (talk) 13:07, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know, but that's probably a topic more appropriate for Talk:Capital punishment in the United States. --MichaelZimmer (talk) 22:00, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capital punishment in New York 

message: Further Reading?Is it really necessary, I mean maybe remove some of the not-so-important books, a few deserve a mention but some just don’t need to be there.Or maybe that section could be removed and a separate article on books in nyc could be created.
from,
Movie-lover93 03:27, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As it stands now, the Further Reading section is pretty short, especially considering how many books have been written about New York — even without travel guides and fiction. I think the current version is perfectly good. If you insist on having a separate page, maybe have it be a longer, annotated Further reading list.  — AnnaKucsma   (Talk to me!) 13:49, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further Reading 

message: Both The Bronx and Queens are mentioned as being the birthplace of hip hop.  Which is it?
--IRelayer 22:56, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Bronx. Who knows where the Queens statement came from, but it's new and wrong. –Joke 23:44, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Birthplace of Hip Hop 

message: I am trying to work on a large City Strawpoll to end the feuding about larger cities in the United States. Please visit the page, User:Ericsaindon2/Sandbox and leave comments on the talk page, but dont edit the actual page. After it has been modified to satisfy the community, I will go ahead and open it. But, please review it and comment, to avoid controversy over its structure. I hope to open it in a few days after discussion, so please be timely in making your comments. Thanks. --Ericsaindon2 05:47, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Large City Strawpoll Construction

message: User:24.185.223.213 changed the population estimate in the opening paragraph to 21.7Million (see diff ).  I reverted it back since the source wasn't updated and so the data and the source were out of sunch.  The source is for 2004 estimates though.  so if someone has a more up-to-date reference it would be great to keep this current. --SiobhanHansa 00:12, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You were correct to revert.  18.7 million is the estimate for the metro area.  21+ million (though not 21.7 (it's 21.9)) is the estimate for the CSA.  The metro areas were updated recently with the new U.S. Census Bureau releases; the next update for the metro areas will come some time after August 15, 2007.  The CSA should not be confused with the MSA.  The Census Bureau determined in 2000 that MSA is a more accurate measure of the metro area than CSA.  Thanks for catching the inaccuracy in the source though.  I'll update that.  Ufwuct 02:25, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Population Estimate 

message: Do we really need that panoramic picture taken from the Empire State Building? The article's text is already big, there's a ton of images too, including other photos in the gallery. This one is way too big and make the loading time even slower for people on dial-up connections. I don't think it's necessary and just slows down load time. --Jtalledo (talk) 10:09, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see the concerns about load times.  I do think it's a wonderful image though, and it's great to be able to make open content images of such impact available through Wikipedia.  Is there a way to have a thumbnail and link to the full version? -- SiobhanHansa 14:22, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The best thing to do is to cut the panorama and the gallery.  Way down at the bottom of the article there are links to the New York City page on Wikimedia Commons, as well as a link to Portal:New York City (which feature pictures).  There is also a commons category with a lot of material.  The commons pages and the portal should be improved, with the links made more prominent here in the article. --Aude (talk contribs) 15:05, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds like a great way to go. -- SiobhanHansa 15:25, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I went ahead and removed both the panorama and gallery.  The panorama was overlapping the Fordham University picture, and I'm not sure a gallery is helpful either when we have Commons to serve that purpose. --Aude (talk contribs as tagcloud) 19:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have also removed the Statue of Liberty picture, which was added  on August 25.  It was appearing in the demographics section, where I think (if anything) we should instead have something that relates better, probably with people.  Perhaps find something on :commons:Category:New_York_City? --Aude (talk contribs as tagcloud) 04:42, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Empire State Building panorama 

message: As a result of the watershed's integrity and undisturbed natural water filtration process, New York is the largest city in the United States with drinking water that does not require purification by water treatment plants...
This sentence from the Environment subheading needs rewording since in the intro it is already stated that NYC is the largest city in the US. └ VodkaJazz / talk ┐ 20:58, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Environment 

message: While researching Jesse Jackson's anti-Semitic comment from 1984 I discovered that "Hymietown" re-directs to New York City - is this on purpose or is someone trying to be funny? --Skurczysyn 11:30, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirect from "Hymietown"

message: Can someone go through the necessary pains of updating NYC population to 8,213,839 and populations of boroughs as well throughout this site and those of the boroughs? Info is here: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/05/nyregion/05census.html Nutmegger 05:04, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: New 2005 population estimates 

message: An editor removed the following from the intro:
"yet New York has the lowest crime rate among major United States cities.""NYC Is Safest City as Crime Rises in U.S., FBI Say." Bloomberg News 12 June 2006.
I think it's important to mention the low crime rate in the intro.  But, in thinking about it, I don't like the way this is worded.  One issue is the word "yet", which essentially says in spite of NYC's large population, it has a low crime rate.  In the criminological literature, research supports the notion that dense population (e.g. many potential witnesses) can be a deterrence for crime.  In connecting NYC's population size with its crime rate, with the word "yet", isn't the way to go.  Secondly, I know the "lowest crime rate" is cited.  But, there are many ways to manipulate the crime statistics to make NYC rank the "lowest". (what's the defintion of "major U.S. cities?", what crime types are included in this ranking? etc.) I don't think it should be stated in absolute terms, with the word "lowest". --Aude (talk) 03:30, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Crime mention in intro

message: It may interest editors of this page to know that a proposal has been made to change New York, New York, which currently redirects here, to a disambiguation page.  Please feel free to comment at Talk:New York, New York (disambiguation).  --Russ (talk) 21:54, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed move for related page 

message: There is a survey in progress at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (settlements) to determine if there is consensus on a proposed change to the U.S. city naming conventions to be consistent with other countries, in particular Canada. --Serge 05:42, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: However the proposal would allow U.S. cities to be inconsistent with the vast majority of other U.S. cities and towns, which (with a few exceptions) all use the "city, state" convention. -Will Beback 23:38, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey on proposal to make U.S. city naming guidelines consistent with others countries

message: I haven't edited this article in a while. We are back to having all but one picture be of Manhattan. A little bird once told me there were other boroughs, though. –Joke 03:42, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why are there two pictures of Central Park?  One needs to go. --Aude (talk) 03:44, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures