Talk:Union City, New Jersey

message: Alan, I appreciate the collaboration, and respect the articles and information therein you have provided, but there is no need for  subheading on Federal or State representation.  The need for subheadings arises only when the section is large enough that it warrants subdivision.  The Government section is not that large, and why put a subheadiing, when it's the only one there, and when the passage before it so brief?  All the information there can be summed up under "Government."  Also, you removed the sources I provided.  Please don't do that.  Wikipedia wants its material to be sourced/referenced.  Thanks.  Nightscream 15:46, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Government

message: I removed the passage at the end of this section that stated, Due to its location Union City resembles a small town with a lot of New York City influence. Most people live in old two or three family houses lining narrow one-way streets.  First of all, in what way does "resemble" a small town?  It is a small town.  Second, why does 68.46.36.1, the anonymous author of this passage keep adding this assertion about housing, but without citing a single source?  I cannot find a source for this assetion, either in the main body of the article where it is made, or in the Sources section.  I'd try talking to him on his discussion page, but he doesn't have one.  If continues to add this material, I will be forced to contact an administrator to have him blocked.  Sorry.  Nightscream 10:26, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This is just a thought - but the person might actually live in Union City and is probably speaking from personal experience. The comment about "resembling a small town" probably refers to the fact that (a) the county is very densely populated and is across from Manhattan, which is also densely populated and (b) the town is primarily residential. I don't think that a discussion of housing requires a reference; it's something that you can visually identify. I think you're getting a little too carried away. Darkcore 17:17, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Now that you've elaborated, I agree. I haven't been watching this article closely, but I will be monitoring the anonymous editor's changes from now on. Darkcore 20:48, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Geography

message: I did try to see if I could get directly from the Census Bureau's web site listing the percentage of Hispanic population in new Jersey's 566 municipalities (preferably in order), but I was unable to do so, and which would have provided ironclad documentation . However, the link that was inserted into the article to back up the claim, List of U.S. cities with Hispanic majority populations#New Jersey, does not just list a few arbitrarily randomly selected cities in New Jersey. As stated in the descriptive portion of the page, it lists every single municipality in the state that has a majority Hispanic population, using data provide based on the United States 2000 Census from the United States Census Bureau. All other municipalities in the entire state of New Jersey are under 50% Hispanic. Of all of the municipalities listed on that page, Union City at 82.3% is the highest in New Jersey. I went to the Census Bureau web site and spot checked and confirmed these numbers within a reasonable range. I think it's hard to argue that there is some other municipality that exceeds Union City's 82.3%. If you can think of one that is not on the list, please let us do the research on the Census site. If it's greater than 82.3% then it's the highest. But other than having documneted justification to debunk the claim, I think it should stand as is. Alansohn 14:57, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Union City having highest Hispanic population by percentage 

message: The fact that there is no sales tax on clothing in Union City is not a result of its being an urban enterprise zone as the article implies. There is no sales tax on clothing anywhere in New Jersey. I am removing the statement for now, but if somebody wants to put in a more accurate statement on this point, go ahead. Mjj237 14:56, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Urban Enterprise Zone 

message: Why does the article state that Union City, NJ is a suburb of New York City in the introduction?
:Are you saying that it is not a suburb, or are you saying that it should not be in the introduction? By most definitions of "suburb" it would seem to qualify as such for New York City. Whether it should be in the introduction is, of course, arbitrary. Backspace 07:23, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suburb of NYC? 

message: If Veronica's Veil was first performed in 1914, and The Park Performing Arts Center's Passion Play opened in 1915, how can the Park Theater's play be the longest-running in America. Veronica's Veil is still performed to this day. This claim being utilized by the Park Theater's Version is just taking advantage of the fact that "the Veil is no longer in Union City.
:The Park Theater's can easily be the longest-running in the country if the location where it was first performed in 1914 stopped showing it eventually.  "Oldest" and "Longest-running" aren't the same thing. Nightscream 08:19, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Park Theater 

message: 17-Aug-2007: Note that Wikipedia uses "logical quotation marks" with punctuation outside unless stating a direct quote:
:*  Right: The 3 Stooges were named "Larry", "Moe", and "Curly".
:*  Wrong: The 3 Stooges were named "Larry," "Moe," and "Curly."
:*  Right: Einstein said, "Education is the collection of prejudices acquired by age 18."
:*  Wrong: W. Edwards Deming said, "There is no substitute for knowledge". (put period inside of direct quotations)
Note that typical American quotation marks are often interleaved with commas, not logically paired in the Wikipedia style.  The use of logical quotation marks is similar to the nested pairing found in computer-language usage.  -Wikid77 17:13, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How does this pertain to the article? Nightscream 04:54, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Checking punctuation

message: There are barely any Cubans living there, it is 80% South American. Years ago it was mainly Cuban and Italians residing there but now a days it isn't.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.93.233.25 (talk) 18:24, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Source? Nightscream (talk) 00:44, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Cuban population?

message: thumb|library
Thanks for catching my error.  I took pix of the library and the school, uploaded the one and mistook it for the other.  Here's the actual library, in case someone thinks it should go in the article instead of the school, but I think the school pic is prettier.  Jim.henderson (talk) 02:57, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jose Marti 

message: Roosevelt Stadium is certainly worth mention, but is also coverd extensively in its own article as well as in high school article. The school is a landmark for the two reasons mentioned, as an architectural solution to the shortage open space in a city that has none, and being home to a modern new auditorium/theater, a cultural venue. By the way, the architecture of the school recalls the stadium not only in its playing field, but the arched gallery along its western facade is also a nod to previous building.
Ugly as it is New Jersey Route 495 is also a landmark of considerable architectural and engineeering significance not mentioned,as would be the Yardley buidling, but then the article would get too too long, or would need to be shifted. List here, separate article.
In general, landmarks are not necessarily old...Looking at the NJ Register you will some more gems.Djflem (talk) 13:22, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree landmarks are not necessarily old: Remember that I added Cecelia Cruz Park. But just out of curiosity, in what way is the Yardley Building architecturally significant? Nightscream (talk) 17:27, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Landmarks 

message: The image of the UC seal has been listed for deletion on commons.  It is not appropriately licensed for commons, but would be acceptable for upload to the english wikipedia under fair use policy, as long as an appropriate source is provided. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 18:13, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  UC Seal deletion from commons 

message: The population statistics in the lede are in direct contradiction to the those given in the demographics section. Is someone willing to sort this out since the claim of highest density should be well supported and references/math appear to be contaminated. The 80,000 figure likely includes Weehawken which still uses 07087 zip code. Djflem (talk) 09:17, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: 80,000 is obviously wrong, that zip code includes portions of Weehawken (look at the google earth zip code layer).  See here for the 2000 census data:    As of the 2000 census, it is 67088 people in 1.255341 sq miles (3.279807 sq km) = 52977.8 ppl/sqmi (20454.8 ppl/sqkm).  I think we should avoid using the census estimate in the intro and infobox, it is just an estimate and may be wrong.  Also, the "most dense city" label is based on the 2000 census (not the estimate) and the fact that it is a "city" form of government.  Guttenberg is more dense, but not a city.  Manhattan is more dense, but is a county and only portion of NYC.  --ChrisRuvolo (t) 21:25, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Since it will be some time b4 2010 figures are published think it's wise to go with last definitive numbers and the above math. Would you be willing to make this change if no one else is opposedDjflem (talk) 22:34, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Gave it a shot, please review. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 15:22, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

text: Great, thanks.  --ChrisRuvolo (t) 21:57, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Population Statisics

message: (cur | prev)  04:23, 17 June 2010 Nightscream (talk | contribs) (77,701 bytes) (No, that's not how it works. The Lead is a summary of the article, and nothing in the 21st Century section mentions the parade. If it's in the refs, then you have to add the refs to the Lead.) (undo) 
Is there a reason why the above edit restored an identified bad reference for a completely different topic than the one stated in the summary?
I think its generally safe to assume that at least two thousand people of the 40,00 mentioned in ref 30, the 350,000 mentioned in ref 31, and the 200,000 mentioned in ref 34 came to Union City to see the paradeDjflem (talk) 21:50, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Cuban Day Parade

message: As it seems the discussion regarding: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New Jersey/Hudson County Task Force#Use of templates for federal, state and county representation will be re-visited, above thread has been started. Please post your comments there as a way to keep it centralized and arrive at consensus. Thank-you Djflem (talk) 13:32, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hudson Task 

message: Hispanics remain the dominant ethnic group in the city, and their percentage of the population has increased from 82.3% in the 2000 Census to 84.7% in the 2010 Census. Non-Hispanic whites made up 15.3% of the city's population in 2010; up from 13.3% in the 2000 Census. Blacks made up 5.2% of the city's population in 2010; up from 3.3% in the 2000 Census. The rest of the racial makeup of the city was 0.70% Native American, 2.15% Asian, 0.08% Pacific Islander, 28.19% from other races, and 6.87% from two or more races.[90][91] 
This can't be correct, because the Hispanic and non-Hispanic white populations alone would total 100% - which would mean that all of the black, Asian, Pacific Islander and Native American residents would have to be Hispanic, which obviously isn't the case.  The non-Hispanic white figure is probably wrong. 108.254.160.23 (talk) 01:52, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Population numbers exceed 100%