Perhaps it would be a good thing if we standardized the name format. I would propose the |Neighborhood, Borough| format, which seems to be the most common. Opinons?--Pharos 12:53, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I agree with the proposed neighborhood format. I suggested much the same in a plea on one of the help needed pages. --Elijah 22:24, 2004 Dec 29 (UTC)
I don't mind standardizing how the borough is referred to when it's included (e.g., change Midtown (Manhattan) to Midtown, Manhattan although the former looks more natural). I don't think we should add in borough names unnecessarily, though. Coney Island is the name that people would search for first and that contributors would most naturally link to. JamesMLane 00:40, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
There was a big dust-up about this recently regarding the City Island page. Rather that re-hashing it all here, I suggest you take a look at Talk:City Island, New York.--RoySmith 02:16, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I noticed similar debates on a number of pages, which is why I created this page to coordinate our efforts. As to the City Island discussion, my opinion is that we should treat inhabited areas primarily as neighborhoods rather than geographical features, because humanity has to come first. There is still the question of whether to include 'New York' at the end of the name. I am somewhat agnostic on this, but I think it's reasonable to say that this is connected to the names of the borough articles, which are currently at |Borough|, and were formerly at |Borough, New York|, or even originally I think at |County, New York|. So, the current borough articles also serve as 'county' substitutes, which would argue in favor of including "New York" in their name and the perhaps the names of their neighborhoods. As to overspecificity, ie |Neighborhoood, Borough| or |Neighborhood, Borough, New York| when |Neighborhood| would be sufficient, I do not think this is a problem, because of redirects and because a longer name should not detract from the Google ranking, nor does the search engine differentiate between punctuation, like |Midtown, Manhattan| and |Midtown (Manhattan)|, or arguably the most common form, |Midtown Manhattan|. But overall, considering that there are literally hundreds of neighboorhoods in the city, I think we could definitely benefit from a standard, even when |Coney Island| is so clear.--Pharos 11:51, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I've gone back and forth in my own mind a few times on this.
There was one argument that "City Island" (just to pick a random example, the same is true of any neighborhood name) is not a "census-designated place", so it shouldn't get a comma. I've come to think that this is totally silly. The net is international; why should the US Census Bureau drive naming standards on an international project? Even in NYC, the way people divide the city up into neighborhoods completely ignores official boundaries, and the list mutates over time (often driven by real-estate agents wanting to drum up new business :-))
The distinction between "Inhabited area, New York" and "Geographic feature (New York)" does have a certain geek appeal, but the distinction is technical and subtle. To the casual reader, it just looks non-uniform. Still, I can't get too worked up over it. This seems like a situation where content is much more important than form. PIck a style and go with it. Undoubtedly, new contributors will get it wrong, and roving hoards of self-appointed wiki punctuation police will come along and correct them. My only suggetion here is that the correction include a (polite) pointer to the style sheet, so the correctee can learn from the experience instead of just getting embroiled in a flame war.
A more interesting question (to me) is what kind of content should a neighborhood article have? Do we want each one to head off in whatever direction the author(s) feel is important, or do we want some kind of uniformity with fixed headings (geography, demographics, etc, etc)? I suspect some guidance as for common headings would be good, but freedom to wander off the fixed path is good too. Perhaps more important is where is the line drawn between a dry recitation of facts and delving into political/social issues of the community?
I don't think we should be too confining as to content, and should encourage the discussion of political/social issues, which tend to be among the most interesting. I would just see maybe some common headings and something like a Don't Forget! checklist of important characteristics like ethnicities, wealth and poverty, housing, local economy etc. that locals might consider so obvious so as to forget to mention.--Pharos 18:24, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I'd like to point out Astoria, New York (which I suppose will need to be re-named as [Astoria, Queens], as an example of what to me is an ideal neighborhood article: the writing is lively and engaging, and there is a nice mix of history, culture, demographics, and specific information about what exactly the neighborhood, and its various parts, looks and feels like. Moncrief 19:23, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
Just to add another little twist to the naming story, User:Rmhermen just came around the other day and renamed a whole bunch of "..., New York" articles to use the "... (New York)" style. --RoySmith 19:39, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Hi, I'm pretty new to Wikipedia, and even newer to the New York Wikiproject. I'd like to say, I'm in favor of standardizing around the format of "(Neighborhood), (Borough), New York." This is for three reasons:
1) It helps denote the importance of the borough/county-level in New York City, at least from the perspective of government and services. It's insufficient to title something "Neighborhood, (New York)." There are several borough-related elected offices (borough president, district attorneys, and judges), as well as borough-level bureaucracy (for police, firefighters, housing inspectors, etc.). To put it another way: Even if City Island is considered "on its own" as a part of New York City, having the entry named "City Island, New York" would lead one to think that a crime there would be prosecuted by the New York County DA at New York County Courthouse and not by the Bronx County DA at the Bronx County Courthouse.
2) At the same time, as ultimately the powers granted to the five boroughs are flow from the State of New York. This is important to note, as it's the underpinning of a lot of the politics of New York City - the Campaign for Fiscal Equity lawsuit, for instance; or the 1970s Fiscal Crisis. Hence, it's insufficient to simply have a "Neighborhood, (Borough)."
3) "Neighborhood, Borough, New York" allows for even more specific entries (such as Canal Street or Arthur Avenue) to get fit into a nomenclature of "Canal Street, Chinatown, Manhattan, New York" and "Arthur Avenue, Belmont, Bronx, New York." This is an important distinction, as when people commonly use "Arthur Avenue" or "Canal Street", they mean the marketplaces of Belmont and Chinatown, and not necessarily the entire street.--Daniel 18:02, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)
I'm in favor of this format, ex. Greenpoint (neighborhood), Brooklyn, Midtown (neighborhood), Manhattan. It does an important thing and stress that these places are indeed neighborhoods in the title. I do not think "New York" is needed at the end since The 5 Boroughs are well enough known throughout the U.S. Within the first couple of lines of the article it should be stated that it is located in New York. Zimbabweed13:04, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
The neighborhood where people live only occupies a part of the island (most of it is the Jamaica Bay Wildlife Refuge), but I see no good reason why everything shouldn't be under Broad Channel. Compare the Coney Island article. Incidentally, I think that name is actually originally of the channel (geography) by the island.--Pharos 03:05, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
There is no reason why New York City should not be a featured article, and I think with a few improvements it can be. I proposed that on the main project page, and Andre, perhaps a little prematurely, thought it was already good enough and immediately put it up for debate and a vote, which it unfortunately lost. I say we can make this a COTW of sorts, and, perhaps, get this done in a few days (of course to be a canonical COTW it has to last for a week). Then we can go back to a new featured article vote with all the goods on offer. The article is already pretty long of course, there might be some topics that could be moved to new articles and summarized in the main aricle so there's more room for basic content. What do you think?--Pharos 13:19, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Interestingly did you know over the last few months New York City has been consistently one of the most visited articles (in the top 5, look at the stats page) on wikipedia. It really should be brought to featured status, because it is a major page. --Ctrl buildtalk 20:42, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I must admit I'm rather surprised by this, perhaps Wikipedia is catching on among New Yorkers, certainly that page has a rather low relative google rating (on the 9th page). Anyway, I think now is the time to be bold, and say that I plan to submit this to Wikipedia:Featured article candidates on January 7 in commemoration of the 81st anniversary of George Gershwin's completion of Rhapsody in Blue. Like many, I have been working on it intermittently for a while, but now I think we can finish the job. I hope we can collaborate productively--Pharos 12:34, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Anyone else notice that the page is rather large (well over the 32 kilobytes suggested size) and as such could use a little bit of cleanup? -- Jtalledo 12:50, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Photographs
I took several photographs during recent trips to NYC that I've put on various NYC-related sites. If I had known before my trips how easy it was to upload to and display photographs in Wikipedia, I would have taken more. (It's about as easy as attaching a Word document to an email). Perhaps those of you who live in the New York area would like to take more photos to provide greater depth to various NYC articles? I think that photos are an ideal way to provide more depth to any article about a specific place. Just a thought. Moncrief 18:09, Dec 30, 2004 (UTC)
I'm half an hour from the city on a good day, so let me know if you pictures of something are needed. Andre (talk) 20:26, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
I'm even closer than that, and am in the city every day, so I would also be happy to take pictures as needed. Let me know on my talk of what needs to be done. Darkcore 22:28, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I think photographs of any neighborhoods or buildings would be a welcome addition to the corresponding articles. I think any list of needed photographs would not be exhuastive; in my mind, the eventual goal would be at least one (relevant) photograph on every NYC-related page about a specific place, building, museum, and so on. Moncrief 23:08, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
Monicref, that's a good goal. I probably have a couple of pics I can upload already, and will definitely be able to take more.--Pharos 18:12, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Please take a look at Sage Reynolds' site: www.newyorksnapshot.com. (sorry, I am SUCH a nerd when it comes to making the black turn blue). He gave permission to use his photos on Wikipedia (with credit). One in particular in /nightshots of the Chrysler Building (#8) is simply stunning. There are others as well. It's not my decision, I'm not involved with this article, but it's a great potential source of photographs to consider. He's quite professional. allie 14:04, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
For him to give permission to use a photo on Wikipedia is not enough. He has to license it under the GFDL or release it into the public domain. Wikipedia policy is to allow other sites to mirror our content, so we can't be in a position where the photographer says, "Hey, I said Wikipedia could use it, but I never said InfoSearchPoint could use it." (Everything we do with the NYC article is reflected in numerous such mirror sites, e.g. [1].) You can find useful forms for securing the necessary permission at Wikipedia:Boilerplate request for permission. JamesMLane 03:26, 10 Jan 2005
(UTC)
Thanks. Sent the form, requested info on Bryant Park, and will find out what else he has available, if he chooses to cooperate. Best Regards, allie 21:09, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I have a specific photographic request, actually. Can someone in or near NYC take a photo of Bryant Park for Wikipedia? The photo on that page now is, er, to put it nicely, not very relevant. Thanks. Moncrief 00:54, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)
Will check on the pronto re: Bryant Parkallie 01:55, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I have full permission to use photos, and a good sample are on my User:Alisonsage page. Bryant Park is filled with smoke at the moment, but Battery Park would make a nice shot, according to Sage.allie 20:28, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I've brought this up on the various photo request pages, but no luck. This shouldn't be too hard; can someone get a photo of a subway sign with a bunch of services, possibly at the Times Square mess? A rollsign on a car might also be nice; I'm thinking about photos to add to New York City Subway line, route and station nomenclature. --SPUI (talk) 15:09, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
New York counties
I've noticed that none of the five counties of NYC is in Category:New_York_counties. Is there a good reason for that? BernardM 02:53, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
They look like they're there to me. In fact, they're double listed (both county and borough names, which is probably wrong). --RoySmith 02:59, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
There are subcategories for these counties (several of them empty!) whereas articles such as Kings County, New York should (also) directly belong to Category:New_York_counties, as for the other counties. BernardM 03:45, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Ah, I see what you're saying. I have no idea why it's done that way.--RoySmith 04:17, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Well, there are no county articles; appropriately enough, they are all redirects to the boroughs. This has caused an awful lot of confusion and irregularities on the New York pages. Perhaps we should rename the borough articles Brooklyn (Kings County, New York), etc. There is even a trick then to still get it listed alphabetically as Kings County. I would still retain the shorter borough names for other uses, however, like in the titles of neighborhood articles.--Pharos 14:08, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I believe having [[Kings County, New York]] -> [[Brooklyn]] is fine. I'm gonna try to fix this mess. BernardM 14:52, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Alternatively, we could make the categories redirects also, but that has a couple of other problems, particularly that the category redirected to becomes a subcategory of the category which redirects there.--Pharos 16:04, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I don't think I see the real problem with [[Kings County, New York]] + [[Brooklyn]] -> [[Brooklyn (Kings County, New York)]], which is as far as I can see the only way to reconcile the boroughs with the county 'system'.--Pharos 16:15, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I've emptied the [[Category:Foo County, New York]] of NYC and removed these categories from the relevant articles (Bronx, etc). Now we just have to definitively remove these categories. Is that ok with you? I don't understand what you mean with "[[Kings County, New York]] + [[Brooklyn]] -> [[Brooklyn (Kings County, New York)]]". PS: I've done this work before reading your 3 last messages (wikipedia was _so_ slow that I didn't check this page). BernardM 16:53, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Yes, wikipedia is quite slow right now. Pardon me if I was obscure, I only remaking the point that the boroughs would fit into the county categories if they were renamed |Foo (Fa County, New York)| and also their categories renamed similarly.--Pharos 18:19, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
We're obviously going to keep the [[Brooklyn]] name, and we need a redirect. So I don't see why [[Brooklyn (Kings County, New York)]] is better than the standard [[Kings County, New York]] name. The only drawback is the name in Category:New York counties, but maybe one day we'll be able to specify the name to be used in the category (I was told it has already been asked to the developpers). For the moment we can't avoid having a bad name in the category, so we should at least have a standard redirect name, shouldn't we? BernardM 21:12, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Actually, I was considering renaming Brooklyn as Brooklyn (Kings County, New York), which would solve categorization and classification problems. I know it's a slightly radical solution, but at least it works with the software currently.--Pharos 19:17, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Did you read what I wrote at 21:12, 3 Jan 2005? Using a redirect doesn't break categorization and classification since they're based on the [[Category:XXX]] stuff. The displayed name in the categories is the only drawback. Please answer my previous message instead of keeping saying "Brooklyn (Kings County, New York) is the answer". BernardM 22:14, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)
CatagoriesCategories
We've grown a large number of lists and categories of things related to New York. In some cases, they are redundant (i.e. Geography of New York Harbor#islands and Category:Islands of New York City, but I think the real problem is that it's hard to get handle on just what categories exist. I've made a couple of attempts to just create a list of all the catagories, but I haven't had much luck (googling for {catagory new york} in titles doesn't seem to work right).
I think it would be useful if we could at least create a comprehensive list (perhaps a super-category) of all the New York related categories. That would make it easier for people to start to categorize all the NY articles, and the top-level category would be a collection of all NY related information.
They are categorized (but not perfectly). I've been doing some work on this recently. See Category:New York City. The state's main category is Category:New York.--Pharos 06:49, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
OK, thanks for pointing that out. BTW, I noticed that under Articles in category "New York City", Geography of New York Harbor is listed under N, not G, and New York City isn't listed under any letter at all. Any idea how that happened? Isn't the list generated automatically? --RoySmith 13:06, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
The list isn't generated automatically. Editors working on an article decide that it belongs in one or more categories, and they edit it by adding the appropriate tag at the bottom. If you open the edit window for Geography of New York Harbor, you'll see its two current categories down at the bottom.
When an article is in a category, then, to that extent, the list is generated automatically. By default, the articles are listed alphabetically by their current titles. You can, however, modify the category tag in the article to alphabetize it differently. For example, in Geography of New York Harbor, the second tag is [[Category:New York City|New York Harbor]]. The use of the piped link means that this article will be alphabetized as if its title were "New York Harbor".
That's kind of cool, but I don't see why you would want to do this.
By contrast, the other tag, [[Category:New York City geography]], doesn't use that feature, so if you go to the list at Category:New York City geography you'll see the article alphabetized under "G". (This is also how articles about people get alphabetized by their last names rather than first names.) As for the article on New York City, it follows the convention that an article with the same title as the category is put at the head of the alphabetical listing. This is accomplished with a piped link to an asterisk or, in this instance, a blank space: [[Category:New York City| ]]. Thus, if you go to Category:New York City, you'll find the New York City article at the top of the list of articles.
By the way, if you want to refer to a category list in a talk page comment, you insert a colon at the beginning. If you type [[:Category:New York City]], it will produce Category:New York City, a link to the category page. If you type [[Category:New York City]], it will include the talk page on which you're typing in the category list, which you don't want.
I don't know how googling for categories would work, but in your example above ("I haven't had much luck (googling for {catagory new york} in titles"), you misspelled "category". JamesMLane 18:21, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Ugh. That's what I get for not cutting-and-pasting. I'll try this again. If I execute Google Search for categories (if you click on that, then click on "advanced search", you'll see the query in a more readable form), I get back 4 hits:
I don't understand why I don't get back all of the categories pertaining to New York --RoySmith 18:42, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Well, I got back 16 but there's really no purpose to using google (which isn't perfect anyway) for this. It's easy to navigate up and down through the categories. Remember, category X is inside of category Y, which is inside of category Z etc. Please see Wikipedia:Categorization.--Pharos 19:25, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Navigating the category tree will only find catagories which are part of the tree. What I'm trying to find is categories which got left out of the tree, like Category: Silly New York Meta-Articles.
The next (very large) step will be to find all the articles which mention New York in the body, and see if they can/should be categorized into any of the existing categories (or new ones invented).
The problem with 'what links here' is that it only displays the first five hundred and there is a real tendency to overlink, especially to something like New York City. I'm thinking we might generally want to adopt some sort of philosophy of "Minilinkism" of only linking to things really directly relevant to make the 'what links here' more useful. Of course Broad Channel should still alphabetically fit; but this list is not quite alphabetical, which is just another quirk, and so it falls within the issue of the excessive linking to the article.--Pharos 20:33, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Speaking of over-linking, Broad Channel (typical of its genre) says something like "... is in Queens in New York City". There's two questions that come to mind about that.
First, is the NYC link really needed at all? It's easy enough to click on the Queens link, and discover that Queens is in New York. Second, if it's there, is this the best phrasology? The "blah in X in Y" language always sounds kind of clunky. I tend to prefer "... is a neighborhood in Queens, New York". Should we have an official style and do them all the same way? --RoySmith 20:56, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Hey New Yorkers. Any help, like peer-reviewed comments or your supporting vote, would be most appreciated in my attempts to get the Gowanus Canal article featured. Thanks! --Howrealisreal 21:05, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Following the discussion on its talk page and from my own knowledge, I can see that the History of NYC is a very broad subject that could well do with a serious expansion into a multi-article series. Hopefully this project could breed further collaboration among members of this project and everyone interested in the topic. Please see discussion at Talk:History of New York City.--Pharos 20:23, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
OK, I finally finished the reorganization into a series of seven articles. Comment/feedback?--Pharos 21:03, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
NewYork-geo-stub
Hi all - over at WP:WSS we've just created a new stub category which may interest you (I've listed it on your project page, too). {{NewYork-geo-stub}} is for geography items related to new York state, but understandably quite a number of them relate to the city in some way. Note thattechnically a lot of the things marked NYC-stub should be in here, as they are geo-stubs not general stubs, and it would be better if they were double stubbed (i.e., had both templates on them). That way, editors interested in geography rather than a particular city can also find them.
You'll also probably find quite a number of New York buildings in the category linked to {{US-struct-stub}}, and about NY roads and streets in {{US-road-stub}} - again, please double-stub them rather than completely moving them into the NYC-stub category! Thanks - Grutness...wha? 01:34, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Parks and Gardens -- do we want a list or a category?
I noticed that there's a List of parks and gardens in Paris and figured we want something like that for New York. What's the best way to do it, a list or a category? They seem very similar and I've never quite gotten a handle on when to use one vs. the other. --RoySmith 11:53, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
--I think a list would be a great idea. Right now there are articles on maybe a dozen or so parks in the city, and I suppose they are not organized into anything at the moment. If I find the time, I will try to start this in the next few days. --Jleon 19:40, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
--I had no idea it even exsisted. I added a link to it on the main article, and will go in and add "See also"'s to each of the ones we have articles for. That should help give the list more exposure. --Jleon 12:47, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Collaborations of the Week
Given the geographic location of the city, some of you may want to take a look at U.S. Northern Collaboration of the Week, which has just been relaunched. Do you think it would be a good idea to have our own NYC collaboration?--Pharos 21:05, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Communauty Boards
I started Manhattan Community Board 3. If somebody wanna improve it and help me to do all the other community boards of the city, he is welcome.--Revas 9 July 2005 00:13 (UTC)
Bus routes?
Route X1 showed up today, and I'm not quite sure what to make of it. Does is really make sense to have an article for every bus line in the city? RoySmith03:09, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
In short, no. We could (in fact, we probably should) have a general article of bus routes, though.--Pharos03:18, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
I've created a portal for NYC: Portal:New York City. My goal is to draw attention to the vast amount of information the wikiprojects have about the city -- and hopefully draw new contributors in as well. Also, hopefully a project like this will help draw attention to New York City among the other projects, like wikinews and wikimedia commons. --Quasipalm17:43, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
Open House New York is a program which will open many normally-closed sites for two days on October 8 and 9 for free tours. See their website. Some tours require reservations and may be already filled up. This is a great opportunity to see an unfamiliar side of the city and maybe take some free license photos of it, too.--Pharos19:34, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
Why not list zoned neighborhood schools for NYC neighborhoods (e.g. Rego Park)
The NYCDOE has a zoning tool. Enter the addresses to find the zoned elementary and middle school. WhisperToMe18:53, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Picture requests
I posted these on User:Renata3's talk page. But I know that there are so many of these schools that they may be a bit much for him, so if anyone else wants to take pictures of stuff:
EDIT: A few other pictures:
Hello. I'm a member of the Version 1.0 Editorial Team, which is looking to identify quality articles in Wikipedia for future publication on CD or paper. We recently began assessing articles using these criteria, and we are are asking for your help. As you are most aware of the issues surrounding your focus area, we are wondering if you could provide us with a list of the articles that fall within the scope of your WikiProject, and that are either featured, A-class, B-class, or Good articles, with no POV or copyright problems. Do you have any recommendations? If you do, please post your suggestions at the listing of all active Places WikiProjects, and if you have any questions, ask me in the Work Via WikiProjects talk page or directly in my talk page. Thanks a lot! Titoxd(?!? - help us)18:50, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
COTW?
We should start a NYC COTW project, I think it would help out Wikipedia's NYC content a great deal. So many obvious articles are sorely lacking and could be improved greatly with a bit of focused attention. I mean, Chicago has one, so why not? I just thought I'd propose the idea before doing it myself, since I don't have too much time on my hands normally and don't want to feel responsible for the whole thing. --Tothebarricades08:17, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
Many articles covered by this WikiProject lack photographs. As part of a subcategorization of the requested photos category, there is now a category for NY articles needing photos - to use it, just add {{reqphotoin|New York}} to the article's talk page. I have only added a few articles to the category so far, but it would be an easy way to make an extensive list NY-related articles lacking photos. I hope you find it useful!TheGrappler06:31, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
I've worked for the past month to update Portal:United States and keep it better maintained. Though, I think the Portal:United States would be even better with broader participation. One way to do that is instead of choosing the "selected article" myself each week, if others would nominate articles and help make decisions. (same goes for pictures, though these are stocked up through July 29) If there is anything related to NYC (or anything else related to the U.S. - culture, music, literature, geography, history, politics, ...), please nominate. I'd also like people to weigh in on the nominations and help select what should be featured. Thanks. -Aude (talkcontribs) 23:43, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Help requested for the New York hotels page
The page New York City hotels has become nothing more than a spam magnet listing hotels. I do not want to tag it for deletion since obviously a lot of interesting things could be said about the history of hotels in New York and their role in the city's history. For instance, the Hotels in London page is pretty good and something of the same type would be a nice addition to the New York City Wikipedia content. Moreover, having a decent page would prevent spammers from simply adding their hotel to the list! I do not know enough about the subject to do this myself but I am hoping someone on your project can tackle this. Thanks in advance for your help. Pascal.Tesson17:04, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
standardization of neighborhood articles?
Please forgive me for sounding ignorant; I'm sort of new at this. I saw on the project page that one of our goals was standardization, and was wondering if this meant detailing a standard format to apply to (for example) all the neighborhoods in Manhattan etc.
If so, are we brainstorming categories, or is there already a set format that everyone has come up with already that just hasn't been implemented yet?
If we are still in the process of coming up with a format, if that is what we are trying to do at all, I thought the format of the Harlem entry looked pretty good. Something along the lines of this:
This approach would be a good start. In addition to location and boundaries, ideally there should be maps showing the location, with appropriate fuzziness at the edges, where there are differencs of opinion. Neighboring communities should also be listed. We should also try to get demographic stats, where available, though the lack of formal boundaries makes this much harder. I think we're still in the early stages, where most articles exist, but there is no consistency. Why not start with a sample neighborhood and use it as a model. Alansohn13:19, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Boundaries are definitely an issue. I found a great website that can give census information for zip codes (could be complicated because of neighborhood size) that might be helpful. here is an example for 11220 (sunset park). (The "show more" links are excellent.) --Howrealisreal01:55, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Wow, that looks like a great source. Okay, I will choose a neighborhood and try to apply this format to it then and then post it here. But is it poor etiquette to just barge in and change the organization/titles though, or is that okay and just being "bold"? --Drenched02:28, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
I think the title pretty much says it all. Over at WP:NYCS, we have an article for every subway station in the system, but we're missing photos for at least half of the stations. If you have a camera and ride the train, I'd encourage you to take a photo or two of your local station. It doesn't have to be anything controversial (just the entranceway is OK). Thanks, alphaChimplaudare14:39, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
What is the current status of the photography ban anyway? I had trouble finding info about it on the MTA website. Was it ever dropped or is it still current? --Drenched04:54, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
My understanding is that it was dropped all the way back a year ago. The current rule says that amateur photography is permitted as long as you're not using fancy lights or "ancillary equipment". I read it here. By the way, what I'm saying does appear to be the consensus from everyone I've talked to on WP:NYCS. Unfortunately, it appears transit dropped the proposed rule so quietly that most new yorkers think photography is still banned. alphaChimplaudare05:02, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for the update, that's great news! I've never heard of it being dropped and I knew of people being harrassed for picture taking in the not-so-distant-past, so I wasn't sure. And just now, I found this discussion about inconsistencies in law enforcement which I found somewhat amusing. So thanks for the official update on things! --Drenched05:27, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Neighborhood naming convention
In case anyone hadn't noticed, Wikipedia:Communities strawpoll is voting on a uniform naming convention for all neighborhoods of U.S. cities. The proposition currently leading by a wide margin would apparently entail renaming most New York City neighborhood articles to something like neighborhood, New York, New York. older ≠ wiser19:05, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
What would that mean, for example, for Park Slope, Brooklyn? Some possible interpretations:
Park Slope, New York, New York
Park Slope, Brooklyn, New York
Park Slope, Brooklyn, New York, New York
I don't want to get into hair-splitting for its own sake, but New York City is an exception to just about every "rule" appling to U.S. geography. We're one city with five counties, for starters, instead of the other way around like most other urban parts of the country. — AnnaKucsma (Talk to me!) 18:58, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Is there a WikiProject New York City project banner?
Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T219:09, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Upcoming NYC Meetup
You wanted to know when the next meetup was being organized in New York City. Plan for Saturday, 9 December 2006. While you're at it. Come help us decide on a restaurant. See: Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC. Spread the word. Thanks. —ExplorerCDT22:52, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
Adopt-an-Article (yes, the section name is meant as humor)
Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker22:16, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
Is this neighborhood always known as "Downtown Brooklyn", or is it sometimes known as simply downtown when the context is clearly talking about Brooklyn? Thank you. --NE206:22, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
New York Amateur Computer Club invitation
The New York Amateur Computer Club (www.nyacc.org) has requested that someone involved with Wikipedia give the a presentation. (I have directed them to this thread). Would anyone be interested in doing it? Raul65421:14, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
I've edited some Manhattan neighborhood articles, and I've noticed that boundaries are, even when well defined, hard to figure for someone who isn't in New York. I started the article Two Bridges, Manhattan, and I have to admit, if I didn't actually walk on those streets, I'd never know where the neighborhood is. It seems better to show
I'm not Wiki-savvy enough to know how to create an infobox, but I think one would be really useful, especially since a lot of bare minimum info that every 'hood article should have. It could contain:
Rough map showing the location
Generally agreed upon boundaries, N/E/S/W
Neighboring neighborhoods
Subway lines serving the neighborhood
Zip code(s)
Community Board
At the very least, is there a simple public domain map of the island where one could just fill in the neighborhood? Mosmof18:14, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Maps are do-able. I have GIS map files for community boards, zip codes (really want that included?), subway lines, etc. The data can be used to (1) make the maps (2) largely automate generation of infoboxes by querying and pulling in the attribute information for each neighborhood. --Aude (talk) 18:52, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
I was thinking something like the map on the New York City page, which just shows its relative location in the state. I'm not sure I completely understand GIS, but it sounds good. Mosmof19:25, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Posted this at the NYC Transportation WIkiProject too: Just thought I'd drop by to make you aware of a move by a user who has categorized himself as a 'Mergist Wikipedian' to delete 'Category:Streets in New York City', so that it may be ultimately merged into a single 'Streets and Squares' category. If you wish to express an opinion, the place to do it is here. --Keefer4 | Talk02:01, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Photo request
Hello. I was wondering if anyone has or could take some photos of 55 Central Park West so I could use them in Ivo Shandor, an article I am working on improving, for obvious reasons. : ) I would greatly appreciate it as I am near Chicago with no plans to be in New York anytime soon. Thanks ahead of time. IvoShandor13:43, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Request for advice: which streets in Manhattan are major?
I'm working on a map of Manhattan, showing general traffic patterns with the one-way roadways. Obviously the avenues are all major, and so are the wider two-way streets. But how about Lower Manhattan: there are some obvious ones like Broadway and Trinity Place/Church Street, but there seem to be a large number of roughly equal streets. Does anyone have any good ideas for how I can decide which ones to include? Thank you. --NE219:05, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Central Park West Historic District, an article (collection of articles) I have been putting some effort into, is undergoing a current peer review. Any comments from NYC natives would be most helpful. Please consider posting some comments on the review.
In addition see (feel free to comment on the talk pages):
Ghostbusters Building: main question here, should the article just be called 55 Central Park West?
Comment: I find the background color too saturated, so that it renders the link to the project page hard to read. I would consider a much less saturated background color, either dark or light, but chosen so that text of various colors are easy to read. Gosgood (talk) 15:00, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Do you and everyone like the newly changed userbox? Feel free to say your opinion and put it onto your userpage!!ROOSTER (talk) 19:05, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Lately, I've been working to bring the WTC article, and its subarticles to featured status. Right now, one is at peer review - Wikipedia:Peer review/Design and construction of the World Trade Center. It covers historical/planning aspects, as well as structural design and construction. Before going to WP:FAC, this article can use some folks to look it over and make suggestions, make sure it's not missing any important details, etc. Any help with reviewing the article would be most appreciated. --Aude (talk) 15:58, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Biographies
Do you guys cover biographies of people born in New York as within your scope? Was just about to tag one but I'm not sure if that's within your scope :). SeveroTC23:26, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
I'd like to write an article about the 1994 subway firebombings, but I'm not sure how to title it. I'd put it under the name of the perpetrator, but that might not fit with BLP. Any better names that I haven't seen? Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 18:03, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
This category caught my attention when I noticed its parent category, Category:Streets in New York City. Someone had elevated Grand Street to a significance beyond its actual importance in New York City. Doesn't that look a little peculiar, with Grand Street as the only street "spanning" multiple boroughs?
Very few NYC streets have their own category, and generally they are more notable than Grand Street. Beyond that, I don't know of another case where identically-named streets in different boroughs are treated as if they're the same street, as has been done here.
If this were perpetuated, there would be a mess of unmaintainable categories. Fortunately, the example hasn't been emulated. But because it hasn't been, what's been done with Grand Street stands out as being rather peculiar. Marc Shepherd02:26, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Are you saying that streets spanning multiple boroughs should not be allowed to have categories? Or, that spanning multiple boroughs makes a street appear more "significant" than it is?
Surely you can see that this page looks a little peculiar? Someone seems to have a fetish about this one rather unremarkable street. If this category should exist, then there are about 8 dozen others that should exist, but do not. The category for Broadway, you will note, is about the theater district, not the thoroughfare. Marc Shepherd02:19, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
I am in the middle of creating an infobox for streets in New York city. Also I have now opened an IRC channel for the project at #wikipedia-nyc. Leave your comments.Mitch32contribs23:12, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Someone has removed the "prod" from that article. If you want to put in a formal AfD, I would support it. This is not a list of notable restaurants. It's a list of restaurants that happen to have Wikipedia articles. Since the category tells you that, it's basically redundant. Anyone who lives in New York would know that this list is laughable. Marc Shepherd12:36, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
This will be the second of the meetups with a session dedicated to discussing meta:Wikimedia New York City issues. We will also have activities scheduled after the session, with dinner at a local restaurant and (weather permitting) some late-night astronomy thrown in.
Ladies and gents, this article could use some TLC. The Bravest deserve a better article than the one they have. Please clean it up, add citations and get this thing on track to being a GA or FA. Thanks, --Daysleeper47 (talk) 20:46, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I'm specifically going over all of the "World History-Americas" articles and just reviewed Tompkins Square Park Police Riot (1988). I believe the article currently meets the majority of the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues consideringe sourcing that should be addressed, and I'll leave the article on hold for seven days for them to be fixed. I am leaving this message at this project page, along with the other relevant task forces/WikiProjects/editors to the article, since the article falls under this topic and figured you might be interested in helping to improve the article further. The article needs just a few more inline citations and some minor cleanup, and if fixed, I'll pass the article. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page, and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 08:05, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
I didn't see the New York dialect page linked here. Since I haven't been involved in this project, I don't want to add it myself, but I have been involved in the page, and I think it certainly is relevant. mnewmanqc (talk) 02:08, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Cliff Dwelling
Here's a request for the West Side editors: please upload a photograph of the Cliff Dwelling (96th and Riverside). It's one of the earliest forerunners of the art deco style and good be a good subject for a short article. DurovaCharge!00:34, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I'm specifically going over all of the "World History-Americas" articles and just reviewed Collapse of the World Trade Center. I believe the article currently meets the majority of the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article if several issues are addressed. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues concerning sourcing and the lead that should be addressed, and I'll leave the article on hold for seven days for them to be fixed. I am leaving this message at this project page, along with the other relevant task forces/WikiProjects to the article, since the article falls under this topic and figured you might be interested in helping to improve the article further. The article needs just a few more inline citations and some minor cleanup, and if fixed, I'll pass the article. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page, and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 00:42, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
New York Draft RIots FA collaboration
A couple months ago I reviewed The New York Draft Riots for GA status and I passed it. I looked at the page again and it's really coming along so I was thinking that if we added more information to it we could try to nominate it for Featured Article. There are many resources to get information like the Ric Burns documentary New York, to the exhibit at the New York Historical Society website about this. New York Divided So who's with me on this? Bernstein2291 (talk) 02:14, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Hey, you hard working editors who seem to be getting into an edit war over parent categories in multiple articles about bridges including Bayonne Bridge. Please, discuss the matter in some forum and don't just revert each other. Jim.henderson (talk) 22:18, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, and have salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the last meeting's minutes).
In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and (weather permitting) hold a late-night astronomy event at Columbia's telescopes.
Fellow Wikipedians: If any of you are at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, I could use a photo of the ancient Jalisco figurine in the "Africa, Oceania, & The Americas" shown here at Flickr. I have asked the Flickr photog to use this photo, but he balked at allowing commercial use.
We'll also review our recent Wikipedia Takes Manhattan event, and make preparations for our exciting successor Wiki Week bonanza, being planned with Columbia University students for September or October.
In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and (weather permitting) hold a late-night astronomy event at Columbia's telescopes.
Greetings all! I will be going on a trip to New York in early September, and will be taking my trusty digital camera with me. I'll have a few hours to spare each day to wander around, and was wondering if there were any specific photos that this wikiproject wanted from the city itself? I guess a list of requests would be best, and when I go onn holiday I'll snap as many as I can and then upload them. Cheers! Skinny87 (talk) 22:24, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme
As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.
The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.
Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.
Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable)21:09, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Articles flagged for cleanup
Currently, 1181 articles are assigned to this project, of which 378, or 32.0%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 14 July 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. Subscribing is easy - just add a template to your project page. If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page. --B. Wolterding (talk) 16:22, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
Milton Petrie
I wrote a page on Milton Petrie and would appreciate some help or at least suggestions. Although I'm not a New Yorker (I grew up in Connecticut), I remember press coverage of him during the 1980s. He was famous for giving money to the widows of police officers killed in the line of duty, as well as to people like Marla Hanson, the model who was slashed after she rejected advances from her landlord. Although he's been dead for more than a decade, I thought he was worthy of a Wikipedia page. So I wrote it up as best I could, based primarily on the New York Times archives. I'd appreciate contributions from anyone else, particularly anyone who has access to any other reference materials. And there's a "gargoyle" (actually a corbel) on the Cathedral of St John the Divine that was modeled after him. It would make for a nice illustration for the article, if anyone has time to go by and take a picture. Dewey Finn (talk) 02:13, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
Potential move of "New York" article
Hello everyone. Just wanted to let anyone who is interested know that there is currently a move request at Talk:New York to move the state of New York article to New York State (or some other variant) and then either make New York a redirect to the New York City article, make New York a dab page, or rename the city article to New York. Any interested users might want to check out the discussion. Cheers, Rai•me16:55, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
Might you fine folk want to tag this article for assessment and general purposes? Seems to be of some significance to the city. I will be trying to get this to FA in the near future. --Moni3 (talk) 15:42, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
NYC Cultural Institutions
This has been cross posted to Museums, National Register of Historic Places and NYC as it has relevance to both and I don't think enough eyes are on the article. Anyone want to weigh in at this discussion err currently post about fixing that list. I'm not debating the existence of the list, but rather its usefulness. It's currently, as my boss would say, "a crazy salad" and needs to be broken down. Much as we like to be comprehensive, I don't think we can list everything vaguely cultural in NYC on one list, nor should we try. Am open to suggestions. Thoughts? Please weigh in at that discussion for the sake of keeping everything in one place. TravellingCari22:46, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
I've been to that office. It is a typical glass-and-steel office building. The Japanese consulate has a small facility on the 20th floor or so. Nothing on the outside identifies it as the consulate. I'm not sure a photo would be very useful. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 19:13, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
Oh, I thought the consulate had the entire building (as no suite number is listed) - A photo would still be nice for the Wikimedia Commons, as I have photographed various office consulates (See Commons:Category:Consulates and particularly Commons:Category:Consulates in Houston). If the building (299 Park Avenue) has its own article, a photo would be good for that too. If there is an outside indicator (Japanese flag?) that *could* be photographed too. WhisperToMe (talk) 19:24, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
As you can see here, the location is really obscure, doubly so with the plywood covering for construction, that without the photos on that page, it's really easy to miss. Mosmof (talk) 19:41, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
I know when I had to go for my work visa and CoE it was a bear to find so I 'm thinking there's no flag. I walk past this area somewhat regularly. WIll have a squiz next time. TravellingCari19:47, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
Check out the Google Street View of the site, all you see is the UBS AG logo. [2] No Japanese flag. There is a flag pole on the corner with 49th Street, but it is flying the American flag.[3] The flag pole on the corner with 48th street looks like its flying a corporate logo flag, possibly Wachovia Bank. [4] --ChrisRuvolo (t) 12:28, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
A New York Post columnist has written a highly critical article about the state of Wikipedia and New York City. I wonder: how many of the errors he lists are actually our errors, and not his? In any event, the best response of Wikipedia to an article claiming errors is to fix the errors, so I hope bringing it to your attention is helpful and will provide a fun project for a couple of days. :-)
If someone makes a tally of the errors he mentions, and how many (a) we have now corrected and (b) we have determined to have been right all along, and sends it to me, this would be much appreciated... --Jimbo Wales (talk) 14:08, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
We actually were showing it around at the NYC meet, strangely. I'm sure they'll be fixed.Mitch32(UP)14:12, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm not terribly familiar with editing street articles in the least, but it seemed to me as though Roosevelt Avenue was worth of an article. I created a stub article in my userspace, but it's definitely not complete enough for mainspace. I'm not sure where exactly data can be found on street length, etc, and I'm not a native and don't know these things intuitively. I'd appreciate any help that anyone could give me with the article so it can get moved over to mainspace. Feel free to edit the article freely too, even if it is in my userspace at the moment. Thanks! matt91486 (talk) 00:55, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.
A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.
We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot23:18, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Wikis Take Manhattan is a scavenger hunt and free content photography contest aimed at illustrating Wikipedia and
StreetsWiki articles covering sites and street features in Manhattan and across the five boroughs of New York City. The event is based on last year's Wikipedia Takes Manhattan, and has evolved to include StreetsWiki this year as well.
PRIZES
Prizes include a dinner for three with Wikipedia creator Jimmy Wales at Pure Food & Wine, gift certificates to Bicycle Habitiat and the LimeWire Store, and more!
We'll also review our recent Wikis Take Manhattan event, and make preparations for our exciting successor Wikipedia ♥ Art bonanza, being planned with the Brooklyn Museum for February.
In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and (weather permitting) hold a late-night astronomy event at Columbia's telescopes.
I've pretty much sequenced 79th. I didn't know what spandrels are until you used the word but there's an article and by golly, I got a nice shot of one of them thar thangs in Da Bronx a couple months ago and hope the people who tend that article think it appropriate.
Streets in general lend themselves to linear narrative, as in the "walk down" 34th Street (Manhattan) except that's one whose linear narrative is supplemented by two lists that ought to be integrated into the text and some pix should be added. Many streets are one-way, which suggests a direction. As for two way, best I guess to pick the end and side that has a good picture for the top right, and the rest of the pix follow the pattern set by that one. 34th has the disadvantage that the photogenic buildings are mostly notable in their own right and have their own article, hence don't get the homeless pix that I give to 79th, for example. 79th has the additional advantage of being mostly built up in approximately one style in a few decades of urban sprawl and then going quiet, while 34th has rarely had a quiet decade in the past century, hence is eclectic.
I'm interested in providing text for your excellent documentary pictures, Jim.henderson, but not those shot in twilight with colored cards held in front of the camera, demonstrating that a place was "visited" but rendering the photograph unusable for the encyclopedia. An afternoon of subway rides on a scavenger hunt with teams of post-teens doesn't seem suitable for me.
Hey, don't think I'm nearly the best Wikiphotographer in New York. For example, Roger User:Americasroof and User:David Shankbone both take mostly better pictures than me, though they don't bicycle around town snapping everything that attracts the eye; they spend more time and thought on each and it shows in the result. They also use better hardware, but the big difference between my product and theirs arises from the patient application of brainpower.
Commons also has many good pictures among the junk; just have to search to find them. Surely commons:Category:Wikipedia Takes Manhattan took an awful lot of bad pictures. I too take an awful lot of bad pictures all the time; it's just that you don't see the dreadful majority because I keep them locked up instead of sending them to Wikimedia along with my mediocre ones and the occasional good one. And yeah, it was mostly young people with more liveliness and imagination than understanding. I was perhaps the oldest participant, and surely more than twice the median age. Many of the kids, however, were pre teens / early teens with a parent, and adult skills and sensibilities are evident in many of their pictures.
As I do, WTM contestants took establishing shots, useful for understanding the context of the others but not directly useful for the encyclopedia. My establishing shots are generally of street signs or an inscription over a door; many are dark or blurry and all are boring; no problem as long as they can do the job of identification. WTM was organized so the establishing shots would be of a card with a number on it. For WTM I took plenty of establishing shots of both kinds. However, unlike most participants I'm a Wikkan or Wikian or whatever our name is, so my pix were not uploaded with the others. Instead as usual I processed them myself, uploaded, and transcribed the information from the establishing shots to the Commons summary.
What's unfortunate about the WTM shots from non wikian participants is not that they all got uploaded, sharp/bright/good or fuzzy/dark/bad, payload shot or establishing shot. What's unfortunate is that all, or too many of them, went into topical categories where they would be found by article editors looking for good pix. Also many of the topical categories into which they went are new ones, and most of those have not been well linked into the great category tree.
Furthermore the uploading used a hodgepodge of methods, with the result that the majority got no description at all. See commons:Commons talk:Wikis Take Manhattan. Thus, old-time Commons editors who have cultivated the good habit of browsing the Commons directory of undescribed pix found it crammed full of lousy shots not worth describing. Also the author info for many WTM pictures was not filled in. Someone who knows more about bots than I do will have to repair these problems. That is, someone who knows more than nothing.
This winter I intend to take very few pictures. Partly that's because chilly weather discourages bicycling, and partly because in Spring I'll buy a better camera and want to snap the interesting things with new equipment, not old. This may result in a bit of idleness, which would allow reviewing the WTM photos and shoving out of the topical tree the majority that aren't good for the permanent collection. Maybe something should be done with hidden categories to hide the rejects. Meanwhile I have already brought a few good WTM pix into Manhattan architectural articles of Wikipedia, and will surely discover other good ones while sweeping out the trash.
I hope future NYC photo scavenger hunts will be more selective, giving points only for the best pix of each target. Like, allot three points per target, the judges to decide whether to award all three to the best pic, or two points for the best and one for second prize, or equally among the three best. Whatever theory is applied, it will require more organizing to get all the pix judged in a couple hours. February's Wiki Loves Art hunt will be indoors at the Brooklyn Museum; I don't do indoor photography myself and maybe can contribute more as a grunt processing the pix than as a contestant. Jim.henderson (talk) 06:31, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
