Talk:Atlanta/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Fulton and DeKalb

Why does the map only show the Fulton part of Atlanta?

On the other hand, why do the numbers show only the "city of Atlanta" area for Fulton County but the entire area of DeKalb County, GA?

Located in Fulton County and Dekalb County in the state of Georgia County Fulton County, Georgia Area 

- Total  - Water

343.0 km² (132.4 mi²) 1.8 km² (0.7 mi²) 0.51% County Dekalb County, Georgia Area 

- Total  - Water

695.0 km² (268.0 mi²) 7.0 km² (3.0 mi²) 1.00%

→ R Young {yakłtalk} 07:54, 8 January 2006 (UTC)


Piedmont Park

Piedmont Park may be the most visited park in Atlanta, but it is not be the largest park in Atlanta by area. According to the AJC, Piedmont Park is 185 acres, but Freedom Park is 197 acres. [1]

==errata== the masquerade is closed? news to me, since masq.com is still up, shows are scheduled, and there's always cars there when i drive by....

No, it's not closed yet, but the land is up for bid and will likely be sold within the year. [2] -- uberpenguin 15:13, 2005 Apr 13 (UTC)

News report a couple of weeks ago in the AJC said it will close by or before Spring 2006. Too bad. I used to go there when it was Excelsior Mill, with a dinner club upstairs and cinema downstairs (Heaven and Hell, respectively, in Masquerade).Uncle Bubba 06:26, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

==elevation== Albuquerque, El Paso, and Las Vegas also major cities, sits higher than Atlanta.

Maybe just Las Vegas.

Refactoring RFC

In reviewing this page, I realize it is in need of better organization. A quick glance at the table of contents reveals both City attractions and Major attractions sections. The City attractions section contains significant info on businesses, yet there is a Businesses section as well. I know there other who watch this page, so I wanted to get some input before doing something dramatic.

I'm thinking of a new structure something like this:

  • History
  • Geography
    • Climate
    • Neighborhoods
    • Metropolitan area
    • Suburbs
  • Government and politics
  • Demographics
  • Business and development
    • Headquarters
    • Skyscrapers
  • Colleges and universities
  • Recreation
    • Sports teams
    • Major attractions
    • Arts, culture, music
    • Major events
  • Other
    • Atlanta in film and television
    • Famous Atlantans
  • References and further reading
  • External links

It also need a transportation (sub)section but I'm undecided where it should go.

Thoughts? Autiger 17:11, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Refactored as above with existing inforamation; moved some paragraphs to reflect appropriate sectioning. I will be adding and revising information for flow in this structure. Autiger 04:38, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Elton John, Atlantan? Is that where he's living right now? I would think an "Atlantan" is someone who was born in (or grew up in) Atlanta, not a simple matter of residency. --Feitclub 18:41, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)

Elevation

My point is that major city is too broad of a term. It can mean a number of things. Where is the cut off...

Removed some boosterist stuff from second para

I have removed the following from the first para:

CNN and the Atlanta Journal-Constitution have reported that the city's explosive growth, both in geographic size and number of inhabitants, is the fastest of any metropolitan area in the history of the world.

on the grounds that:

  • it is a bit too boosterist in tone for an encyclopedia
  • it quotes two sources but fails to mention both are headquartered in Atlanta and therefore hardly likely to be impartial
  • given the growth rates of some of the third-world mega-cities, I find it hard to believe
  • it presumably relates to the metropolitan area, not the city

I've no objection to similar text being replaced (preferably in Atlanta metropolitan area rather than Atlanta, Georgia, and minus words like explosive), if someone can come up with a respectable and impartial source for the claim. -- Chris j wood 13:02, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)


I believe you are mistaken in the meaning of the claim. It may be used as boosterism by some, but to others it has exactly the opposite import. Environmental organizations in Atlanta use it to provoke alarm, at the high rate of expansion of developed areas at the expense of open space. For them, the fastest-expanding human settlement in history is something to be worried at or ashamed of, not proud of. I disagree that CNN and the AJC are incapable of presenting a fact about Atlanta honestly just because they are based in Atlanta (they merely have a greater incentive to care, one way or the other); on the other hand, I think the fact is impossible to know or prove, and must in any case be clarified. (I believe the claim refers to consumption of open space in absolute area, over a period of three decades. But at best it was only an estimate. The records for historic settlements are hardly definitive.) Leaving it here (or in metro Atlanta) would be fine with the attribution. That is a good deal better than the "some say" formula that prevails in the rest of the encyclopedia.
— Ford 14:32, 2004 Dec 7 (UTC)

I agree the claim is almost impossible to substantiate. It should be in Atlanta metropolitan area if anywhere; the City of Atlanta proper has not expanded appreciately in land area (would require annexations) in the last ten years at least. The city has also just recorded its first population increase (year over year) in several years as well. I honestly don't know that it's worthy of inclusion even as an attribution. Autiger 20:17, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

MARTA

The new transportation section says 'However, the public transportation in Atlanta is seen by many residents as unreliable and not comprehensive enough, so many commuters in Atlanta and the surrounding suburbs use automobiles as their primary mode of transportation.' I wonder about this, as it has a hint of NPOV about it, and it doesn't quite match my experience.

I'm a Brit who for some years worked for a high tech company HQed in Atlanta. As a consequence I was a frequent visitor, and a reasonable frequent user of MARTA (it really is the best way from Hartsfield to Sandy Springs). My experience of MARTA is that it is actually pretty reliable and comprehensive, although the frequencies of both rail and bus could be better and the bus obviously gets impacted by traffic delays. My experience of discussing MARTA with my Atlanta based colleagues was that very few of them knew enough about the subject to make a judgement on reliability or comprehensiveness; many had never ridden MARTA despite having lived in Atlanta for long periods. My conclusion was that the lack of ridership was more a socio-economic thing rather than a usability thing. All of this is a bit too much like 'original research' to include in the article; but what do other contributors think. -- Chris j wood 13:34, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Concur, though I think you meant a hint of POV, and I was planning to revise the new addition after seeing it. At best, it's a gross over-simplification and somewhat inaccurate rendering of MARTA's condition/perception. The writer's proposition (that commuters use cars because of the perception) is not supportable as a direct cause and effect. MARTA rail's issues are directly related to historical factors such as low densities, Georgia tranporation funding limitations, and "white-flight" suburbs rejecting the system at it's origin. Automobile preference is related to the sprawl (low-density), and as you indicate, socio-economic perceptions. Autiger 16:55, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Yes, after rereading what I wrote, I agree with Chris. I went back and removed the reference to reliability and usability. Sayeth 18:05, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
However, in a way, MARTA is still a little unreliable. I am a high school student in Atlanta that uses MARTA almost daily for normal things. I use the train more than the bus, and I have to say that the trains are not that reliable. I have had the Train Driver during many of my rides over-shoot the station. This delayed my ride by at least 10-20 minutes as the driver walked through the train to the other end to drive it back the way it came. This also caused a ripple effect. I have also had the doors jam many times, causing 5-10 minute delays; and I have waited up to 45 minutes for a late train. I love MARTA, but it does need some help. But as far as the track layouts go, I enjoy them. I can get from my house(Midtown) and meet up with them at Lenox Mall in no time. I also enjoy the Grant Park, Candler Park, and Inman Park stations very much. Downtown Atlanta is my life. But as far as it goes, MARTA is useful. (Chris Cruz)

Failed Feature Article objections

The major unresolved objections to this article as a featured article candidate:

  • History section needs work
    • I have added a bit on Reconstruction, WWII, and race riots at the turn of the century Sayeth 21:29, Feb 3, 2005 (UTC)
  • More pictures
    • a map of Atlanta would be nice
    • Added two pictures to history section Sayeth 22:08, Feb 3, 2005 (UTC)
  • Geography section needs something on neighborhoods and sections of Atlanta
    • Describe Buckhead, East Atlanta, Downtown, Midtown, Bankhead, Inman Park, etc.
  • Rewrite prose
    • Rambot info
    • Educational institutions
    • Sports
  • A new section on culture

Photos

The photos on this page are really, really lacking. One modern photo of buildings and the rest are black-and-white historical photos?? If anyone reading this lives in Atlanta, your help is urgently requested! Take some photos for this page. Yikes. Moncrief 18:39, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC)

There are actually a number of photos in the sub-articles that have split off from the main Atlanta article. I'll add back in a few. Sayeth 21:14, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC)
All right, I've got some better pictures for you. Here you go! - Gray wolf 20:52, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
Should it be in its own section like that? It's not a thumbnail depository, this article. Mike H 07:51, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
I agree with Mike. They're nice pictures, but I think most should be pruned out and the rest incorporated into the article. There really is no need to have so many pictures of Stone Mountain, especially since it's not actually in Atlanta. There's already a MARTA, an Underground, and a skyline picture in the article. I've incorporated the MLK and Carter library pictures into Martin Luther King, Jr. National Historic Site and Carter Center, respectively. Sayeth 17:00, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
Speaking of, can anyone get the MARTA logo and put it in its article? Mike H 17:18, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
Done. Autiger 23:02, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

Requested move

Atlanta, Georgia → Atlanta – How is it logical for this article to be dis-ambiguated even though it is the primary meaning of Atlanta?? Georgia guy 02:45, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

  • Oppose Even if Atlanta, Georgia is the most common meaning of "Atlanta," it is more encyclopedic to keep the title more specific. Plus residents of other Atlantas might object. -- uberpenguin 19:54, 2005 May 8 (UTC)
  • Oppose. This isn't just a "disambiguation" naming, but rather consistent with the general rule. Furthermore, since "Atlanta" redirects here rather than to Atlanta (disambiguation, I don't understand what you are bitching about. Gene Nygaard 20:38, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Oppose. I find Georgia Guy´s motion to move the article a tad, well, "Georgiacentric". Furthermore, the redirection to Atlanta, Georgia from "Atlanta" only serves to worsen the situation. Yafuetodo 20:51, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Oppose. I see no particular reason Atlanta should be an exception to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (city names)#United States and Canada. -- Rick Block 13:56, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Atlanta, Georgia isn't the only thing called Atlanta in the world. You're being Americentric by assuming everyone wants Atlanta, Georgia. Should Georgia just go straight to Georgia (U.S. state) because most Americans see the state as the primary meaning of the word? --FCYTravis 04:14, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it to be moved. violet/riga (t) 18:49, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

'Strongly object. I voted against moving this article, but it is contrary to established policy to determine that it should not be moved the day after it was proposed. The relevant Wikipedia:Requested moves policy is this:
  • Page moves requested on this page may be actioned if there is a rough consensus supporting the moving of an article after five (5) days under discussion on the talk page of the article to be moved, or earlier at the discretion of an administrator.
In other words, a decision to move can be made more speedily. A decision not to move should not be made until the five day period has expired. I am commenting out the notmoved stuff, and reinstating the requested move notice. Gene Nygaard 19:23, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
It was a pretty obvious result, and for future reference editing another user's comments is not appropriate, even if you just hide them. violet/riga (t) 20:31, 13 May 2005 (UTC)
That wasn't a "comment". It was notice of an administrative action. Gene Nygaard 21:00, 13 May 2005 (UTC)
Oppose. Wikipedia:Naming conventions (city names)#United States and Canada. Niteowlneils 23:41, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Support - What other Atlanta? If Ipswich can move with competition, certainly Atlanta can!!! --ℬastique▼talk 00:32, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

Discussion

  • This isn't just a "disambiguation" naming, but rather consistent with the general rule. Furthermore, since "Atlanta" redirects here rather than to [[Atlanta (disambiguation}]], I don't understand what you are bitching about. Gene Nygaard 20:38, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
    • Well, let me explain something. Study the history of the Atlanta re-direct. For a long time, it was simply a re-direct. Then one day very recently, somebody removed the re-direct and created a 2-choice dis-ambiguation page, one of its choices was this page itself, the other of which is an article that he created that is orphaned. This is a good advantage of having this article at Atlanta because then the user who created the article would have known that the link belongs in Atlanta (disambiguation). Georgia guy 22:49, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
      • I am the author of the article in question. I don't understand why you consider it "orphaned." I created it recently, as you point out, and I am still working on it. Furthermore, you still have not explained why Atlanta should belong to Atlanta, Georgia instead of simply belonging to the general disambiguation page. Your reasoning isn't justified when you consider the fact that there are other items of interest to the wikipedia community that share the same name. You seem to be ignoring this point. I say put it all in the disambiguation page, without giving special attention to any particular "Atlanta", and let the person accessing wikipedia decide where (s)he wants to go. Yafuetodo 3:19, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

This isn't just a "disambiguation" naming, but rather consistent with the general rule. Furthermore, since "Atlanta" redirects here rather than to Atlanta (disambiguation), I don't understand what you are complaining about. Gene Nygaard 20:38, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

There are execptions (eg New York City) to the rule (See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (city names)#United States and Canada --Philip Baird Shearer 10:07, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
One factor, of course, is the nuber of other places or things with the same name which have articles in Wikipedia (and even other places or things which don't have articles). If you want to claim that it should be an exception, the burden is on you to prove that there is good reason for an exception. Gene Nygaard 13:50, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
AFAIK, NYC is the only exception in the US, and it was moved there without consensus (the only poll at the time ended in a virtual tie, 17-15. Niteowlneils 23:41, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
Las Vegas is a pretty good (and reasonable) precedent that noteriety being more important in my opinion. The actual title doesn't matter, but that Atlanta should redirect to anything but Atlanta, Georgia is pretty far-fetched. Quite few North Americans would ever expect to get anywhere else but Georgia. I've in all over the US, including a high school year in (that's right) Las Vegas, New Mexico, I know the geography fairly well as well as the 150 (or whatever) Springfields, but I had never, ever thought of more than one Atlanta. Just consider the fact that CNN constantly reminds it viewers of the the location of the CNN Center, the '96 Olympics, all the major league sports team, the Coca Cola HQ, the burning during the American Civil War, etc.
I mean, the combined population of the other Atlantas is barely more than 10,000...
Peter Isotalo 14:05, May 11, 2005 (UTC)

Atlwiki.org

Until lately the Atlanta wiki was okay, but something made it say it cannot be displayed. Is this common with wikis?? Georgia guy 00:03, 6 December 2005 (UTC)


Yea, what made it dissapear is a college student who didn't have enough time last semester to maintain properly the server it was living on. But now that summer is here I am bringing it online again... --Freedomlives 05:17, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Lead section

I have restored the four paragraphs deleted by User:Nikostar from the lead as the mass deletion hurt the article per the recommendations for that section. It is slightly long by those standards, but mass deletion was not the answer - judicous thoughtful edits are welcome. Autiger 16:41, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

I think the mass edit was more than justified although i probably took out a bit too much but I will leave it until we have some more opinions here. Have you actually read the lead sections - its ridiculously long and absolutely untypical for the lead section of a city article or for a lead section in general. It is certainly not just "slightly long" - six long paragraphs for a lead sections is not normal for wikipedia (for a good reason). Also it is extremely repetitive; half of it is devoted to the city's history, which is covered in the History section right below the lead section. Look at the first sentence of the second paragraph in the lead section compared to the first sentence in the History section.
Lead section, second paragraph- The Atlanta area was originally inhabited by Cherokee and Creek Indians, and was named Standing Peachtree. In 1823, the area was opened to white settlement. It remained mostly woods until 1836, when the area was chosen as the southern "Terminus"
History section- The region where Atlanta and its suburbs were built was originally Creek and Cherokee Native American territory. In 1835, leaders of the Cherokee nation ceded their land to the government in exchange for land out west under the Treaty of New Echota, and act that eventually led to the Trail of Tears. In 1836 the Georgia General Assembly voted to build the Western and Atlantic Railroad to provide a trade route to the Midwest, with the area around Atlanta--then called Terminus--serving as the terminal.
Almost all of the facts in the extremely long lead section - beyond the first paragraph that is - could be added to other sections or are already mentioned. It really hurts the article and makes it quite unattractive and somebody who contributes here regurlarly needs to edit it extensively.I still beleive extensive editing of the lead section is neccesary and needs to be carried out to bring that section up to a higher standard. --Nikostar 02:09, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
I disagree. If you read something like a World Book Encyclopedia article, there is an emphasis on history and population. Let's face it, some people are full of themselves and like bluster, hip-hop, modern marketing, etc. Yet, isn't this supposed to be an "encyclopedia?" Also, if you don't put some history at the top, most people won't read it. As for the repetition, Wikipedia has plenty of space...this is not a problem. Further, a lack of history was one of the criticisms levelled at the "lead article" nomination. Finally, some people think Atlanta "emerged" in just the last 40 years; this type of thinking is a problem and unfounded. There is little more important about a city than history and population. → R Young {yakłtalk} 08:31, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Lead sections are going to be proportional to the article length and Atlanta is a pretty long article (with good reason) and with long articles, are necessarily going to be repetitive. The lead needs to hit the highlights of the article such that it may stand alone as a summary giving the most important points for a casual reader. The remainder of the article goes into further detail with sections that can even point to stand-alone article for full treatment of certain subjects for the truly geeky. It's a heirarchy of information. I understand Nikostar's position and agree the lead section as it is now should be reigned in - I've been looking at it off and on since Niko posted the comment with an eye towards tightening it up a bit, but it's a challenging balancing act. AUTiger ʃ talk/work 21:09, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

POV statements removed from introductory section

I removed the following information from the intro section, as it largely seems POV, not to mention seriously racially divisive. At the very least, I do not think this belongs in an introductory paragraph, paricularly one that has grown as long as it has in this article. Dr. Cash 21:46, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Atlanta is circled by Interstate 285, called the "Perimeter" by locals, which has come to delineate the interior of the city from the surrounding suburbs. This has given rise to the terms ITP (inside the Perimeter) and OTP (outside the Perimeter) to describe area neighborhoods, residents, and businesses. In this respect, the Perimeter plays a social and geographical role similar to that of the Capital Beltway around Washington, DC.
It is fairly common, although by no means universal, among some residents of the city to make concerted efforts to stay "ITP" in daily life. Likewise many residents of the suburban area refrain from venturing "ITP," often citing fear of crime. Most often these attitudes draw their origins from racial and cultural divisions in Georiga. There is a sometimes considerable friction between the area including the city of Atlanta, and other "ITP" communties with their their majority black populations, as well as considerable gay populations, from the mostly white and far more conservative suburbs.
None of that is POV. That's simply terminology used in Atlanta. If one was to remove all terminology deemed offensive by some, then a good portion of wikipedia would become useless. You didn't make the article more NPOV since the terminology used previously is inherently NPOV. There's a big difference between describing social dynamics in a city and POV. --BWD 22:15, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
As you say, it's mostly true, though neglects to say how the suburbs came to that condition, i.e. white flight. Since racial issues are usually so charged though, it has at least the potential of appearing POV without some decent sourcing. So if it is to be added it should be with good references and in the main body of the article, not the lead. AUTiger ʃ talk/work 22:30, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
It's not necessary to give a lengthy treatment to white flight since the focus of those two paragraphs wasn't necessarily how they got that way, but rather the social construct right now. Besides, white flight has its own article. There's plenty of documentation on "ITP." The paragraphs can be cleaned up a bit, but the content appears exceptionally balanced and uses NPOV language. Removing it completely would rob the article of useful information, particularly for people who don't live or know anything about Atlanta. I suspect that's the target audience we're writing for. --BWD 22:41, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Trust me, I know ITP/OTP is commonly used. The part that needs referencing is the last sentence: There is a sometimes considerable friction between the area including the city of Atlanta, and other "ITP" communties with their their majority black populations, as well as considerable gay populations, from the mostly white and far more conservative suburbs. That could really use some references and quotes to be encyclopedic. And even with the refs, probably doesn't belong in the already overly-long lead. AUTiger ʃ talk/work 23:58, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
I agree that particular part may need to be cleaned up to be a little less 'blunt,' but the statement is largely correct. Atlanta proper is majority black and the suburbs are majority white (according to this article). Most of Atlanta proper is ITP. And you're right; looking on it more closely, this probably belongs in Demographics. --BWD 00:07, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
I've removed the second paragraph, which was really very poorly written and included a spelling error to boot! This was recently (today) added by an anon editor. I've left the original first paragraph, although I personally believe that this should be moved to the demographics section and is not necessary in the introductory section. Dr. Cash 01:42, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Crime housecleaning

I have made a major overhaul to the Crime section with the following justifications.

  • Crime Index scores being cited have been discontinued by the FBI as of June 2004 because the Index "has not been a true indicator of the degree of criminality" and was in fact "creating a bias against a jurisdiction with a high number of larceny-thefts but a low number of other serious crimes..." [3]
  • Statements regarding the Olympics and host city voting were all speculation and conjecture - completely unverifiable.
  • Referencing the panhandling ordinance was off-topic considering the focus on violent crime.
  • Two external links referenced (at least partially) commercial websites with information that could be referenced directly from the FBI site which would be more appropriate per Wikipedia guidelines/policy.

Please be sure that any further information added to the crime section is verifiable, NPOV and a credible, unbiased measure. AUTiger ʃ talk/work 05:33, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

The article needs to be balanced. Your removing negative but true facts is papering over the truth. No statistics are 100% accurate, but certainly the FBI is a reputable source. Also, the withdrawing of "crime index scores" still doesn't change the fact that any way you measure it, Atlanta's crime rate is much higher than the U.S. average. Picking and choosing sourcing is BIASED. Yes, look in the mirror. What a hypocrite to dress someone down for using FBI stats. 66.64.156.146 05:38, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm the one using the most current FBI stats and statements as a source. You're completely ignoring the FBI statement I reference above - the FBI are saying that the former crime index is not an accurate measure and is a biased tool. The comparison you insist on having the article is ridiculous on its face - the crime index score implies that Atlanta's crime is twice is bad as New Orleans' which is crazy. The only reason to include that is to paint Atlanta in a negative light. To continue to use a metric whose creator has disavowed and refuted the metric is intellectually dishonest. Feel free to use the raw UCR numbers for select violent crimes, but don't use the flawed and abandoned metric.

Btw, you added back the completely unverifiable speculation about the Olympics selection process; how do you justify that?

As to your name-calling, I refer you to WP:NPA and from my point of view coming from someone who hides behind an anonymous IP address, it means nothing. AUTiger ʃ talk/work 06:23, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

This is a case where you think you're right, but you're wrong. First, you selectively choose to attack numbers and sources you don't like. Yet, do you think the Atlanta crime stats from the city of Atlanta are 100% accurate? Interesting, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution recently discovered 208 falsely registered voters at just one homeless shelter. Yet, do I see you disputing the vote count numbers? It would be very easily to selectively not report or under-report crimes that occurred. We can't make things 100% accurate. What we can do, however, is cite sources, and whether you agree or not, the stats were properly cited by reputable sources. As for the metric, I wasn't concerned about that. Instead, I was concerned that you are "throwing the baby out with the bath water."
As for the Olympics, did you live in Atlanta in 1990? The news reported that Atlanta won the vote by only two votes, that Andrew Young had lobbied hard for African nation votes, and that African nation votes tipped the balance in Atlanta's favor.
http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/document?_m=99e4d8c1ba166107de39dc77345afca5&_docnum=4&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=628d1eb07f78f5d79f27e41e09ed4c47
Atlanta bidders had a deliberate game plan: Young would lock up the African bloc, which would get Atlanta through the first ballots.
Copyright 2005 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
July 5, 2005 Tuesday Home Edition
Source cited, therefore this should stay.
As for "name-calling," that wasn't name-calling, that was a descriptor. If you are not holding your own sourcing to the same standards that you hold others to, then that's hypocrisy. 131.96.14.236 17:47, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

I did source (directly from the FBI website) the retirement of "Crime Index" based on its flawed nature. As for you not being concerned with the validity of the metric? Don't you think accuracy is important in an encyclopedia? I think you may have missed the point completely.

Your voter registration comment is an awfully poor analogy considering the Atlanta Police Department doesn't handle voter registration, not to mention I don't recall seeing any voter counts in the article to challenge. If there were and the Fulton County Registrar subsequently came out and said the numbers were wrong, we would change the article to reflect that statement. Finally, even if your argument that the Atlanta PD numbers are questionable were valid, it subverts the very metric you want to include because the Crime Index is based on the APD-reported UCR numbers and if those underlying numbers are inaccurate then the derived index cannot be accurate either.

Beyond my accurately sourced deletion of the crime index, there's nothing for me to source, because the onus is not on me to prove that a statement is unverifiable if it is speculative in its very nature. There is still no verification of this statement:

The high crime rate has also negatively affected Atlanta at the International level, where crime statistics were among the greatest factors in the possibility of the International Olympic Committee awarding the 1996 Olympic Games to a safer host city in the early 1990's.

There is no way to know what factors were in the minds of the IOC voters in the selection process; even journalistic coverage of the voting that claimed to know the factors of a possibility would be speculative. That statement (and its verification) is the lynchpin for the rest, because the Andrew Young and African nation voting block statement (and cite) is completely off-topic in a "Crime" section and would (should) not be included if not for statement saying crime almost cost Atlanta the Olympics. AUTiger ʃ talk/work 06:30, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Climate

Stop trying to make Atlanta seem as a chilly city. And the analogy of Dallas is false both cities expierence extreme variation of temperature making those two impossible to compare but to say their climates in winter are similar. As long as the article stands you will be ridiculed. And 100 degrees reading have happened past 2000, check the noaa almanac you'll find more than 4 readings. and a sum of the summer time avg. temperate of 86 is misrepresentful we all live in Atlanta and we know thats not true especiallyin the outlying areas where the temp shoots over 90 nearly everyday. Several corrections, if you want it to be like britanica. You can't make Atlanta seem like the San Diego of the South when in true fact its not. Oh and one more thing why are you puting the snowfall measurement in metrics first? So it seems like a larger amount. Tell the truth and you know snow hereis rare, I am originally from Bedford, TX and Atlanta's not the cold place you make it out to be. The winters are very mild compared to most of the Dallas Metroplex, true Atlanta's summers are milder but with that humidity it feels worse here.

---Living in the Dallas area now (and having spent many years in Marietta as well), I can say that the temperature records in Atlanta are definetly colder than Dallas. It almost never gets below 10°F in Dallas, but single digits are AT LEAST a once annual occurrence in Atlanta. And Atlanta experiences more ice and snow than Dallas, not just because of temperature, but because it is further east and experiences more precipitation year round than N. Texas.

Climate concern

Why are the temperatures given in celsius first and then fahrenheit? It's an American city, fahrenheit should be given first in order to avoid confusion. When I first read the table, when I saw the average January high I thought "wow, 11 is really low!" and then I saw that celsius was first, just as it was throughout the section. Mike H. That's hot 05:02, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

I've lived in Atlanta for 20 years and I only remember the temperature dropping below 10 degrees two different times. That "fresh blanket of snow" was I think in January of 2001 and was the only 2+ inch snowfall from one storm that Atlanta has had in many years.

This is the equivalent of putting a picture of Phoenix Arizona in an intense monsoon rain and labeling the picture "A typical rainy day in Phoenix"

And while it might be true that the summers here are RELATIVELY mild and not to humid compared to the rest of the south, they are still very hot by many people's standards.

Someone please fix all this!

Religion

The vast majority of the section on religion seems to suffer from a large POV problem. Furthermore, citations should be used to either verify or nulify the claims made in that section.

  • "Out of 75 private schools listed in Fulton county, only 8 have no religious ties."
I found a list of private schools in Fulton County under this website:Private Schools Report
It was copyrighted 2005 so it's pretty recent. In total on that list there are 72 private schools with only 20 hinting a Christian affiliation on the school name. Maybe the citation needs to go to this site? Or the claim in the article taken out? --Onejsin 22:39, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Also, I took this out since it's really stupid to include it...

", including Adventist, Baptist, Catholic, Church of Christ, Episcopalian, Friends (Quakers), Islamic, Jewish, Lutheran, Methodist, and Presbyterian institutions, as well as over two dozen non-denominational Christian schools."--Onejsin 00:41, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Lead and article

There's really no reason for this article to be 56k long. The lead is unnecessarily long and should be structured per WP:LEAD. The article should be written in Summary style, with sections in the article referencing more detailed, main articles. I have done some copyediting, wikifying, but a lot more changes will be made. AreJay 02:44, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree. The lead section is much too long. This needs to be fixed if this article is to be considered for Wikipedia 0.5. Kaldari 20:08, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

This article makes me a proud Atlantan ashamed!

Now those migrants to Atlanta needs to stop being the authors of are city's characteristics. You do not know our history or geography so leave it up to us to explain it. You do a better job on your true hometown articles about how horrible it is to live in Michigan or Ohio or where ever you earthed from your rat hole of lies and degradation of are great city. Add all the Correction to the Article in discussion page or I'll take it upon my self. Jim Dobbs, born March 30th, 1953, Palmetto, GA (now inc. in the city of Atlanta)

Hiya. You're free to edit the article just like the rest of us. Feel free to correct any mistakes you see. --BWD (talk) 23:57, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

If you know that much, seriously, add your knowledge instead of criticizing what other people added. Afterall, along with the fact that you obviously know how to edit, you make it seem like you know alot, so start adding and stop criticizing. --Onejsin 22:26, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Sports

I don't know much about sports (in general), but it seems that the sports section has too many individual "paragraphs" which most of them are only a couple sentences. I tried combining some of them but I didn't know how to combine some others. If I did something wrong I'm really sorry but it just seemed like there were too many; if someone doesn't like it, change it back. --Onejsin 03:03, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Climate

I added a few correction to this section, I hope it is appreciated. I thought it would be a little more reader friendly and nuetral, rather than a campaign for tourism before.

Removed section

The following section was placed in the article beneath "crime". It has a few problems which caused me to remove it from the article: 1)It's unsourced 2)It's written in an unecyclopedic, breathless style 3)It overwhelms the article with tangentially related information. I think that this information would be fine if it were cited, rewritten and included as part of an article entitled History of Atlanta (currently a redirect to Atlanta). Sayeth 17:27, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree. It's written in a novel format. It's oddly out of place. --BWD (talk) 20:21, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Mafia

The year was 1931, the bottom of the Great Depression in American. Things were bad for almost everyone. While the citizens wondered what they would eat the next day, the government wondered what they would do with the new problem, gangsters. And the gangsters seemed to be the only ones doing well. It was they who lived outside the law, thus were not hurt when the law gave up on America in 1929. From California to Chicago, the gangsters ruled with an iron fist. And in 1931, Atlanta, Georgia, almost came under complete mob control.

Since 1930, Irishman Mack Ashcroft was gaining control of Atlanta. He had started out as a petty thug and had climbed the ranks through blood and betrayal. Ashcroft's name was feared through out the town but the mayor and the police force still had not submitted to him. But the Irish gangster had plans, big plans.

Ashcroft owned half of the pubs in Atlanta, four of the six well-to-do hotels, and all but one of the fine resturaunts. He knew how much he had and was willing to share the power with others. Phillip Carson operated the north side of town, Tony Bronx operated the downtown area and Caleb Yimmen oversaw the Southside. All three men were dangerous, and willing to submit to Ashcroft's authority.

Then in February of 1930 Ashcroft called together his "three". He introduced his big plan. It included purchasing the rest of the hotels and restaurants in Atlanta, the murder of a good cop, and the forced election of a corrupt official.

The major part of the plan was to obtain all the hotels and restruants in the city that Ashcroft did not already own. While this would be expensive, once it was acheved Ashcroft would have a major say in the city's social life. The rest of the plan was pure politics. The mayoral race was comeing up and Ashcroft had found his canidate. The man was Jim Broth, the most corrupt politician in the city. And that was why he had won favor with the Irishman. On the other hand, not every official could be bought. Commissioner Tim Wayne would not be out of office for another year and he totally despised Ashcroft, so the mobster planned to dispose of him. Wayne and the current Mayor, John Bernstein, were the two major political figures who stood up against Ashcroft. Bernstein would loose the office and Wayne would be killed. On June 30th, the purchases, the murder, and the election were to take place, and one man, Mack Ashcroft would rule the city of Atlanta.

Carson, Bronx, and Yimmen all agreed with the plan and started working on it. Anticipation grew and exciment rose to a fever pitch. Then on June 25th, Ashcroft's body was found stuck in the sewer beneath City Hall. What the Irishman was doing there or who killed him still eludes historians today. But the important fact was that the leader was dead, and someone had to fill the vacuum.

One day after Ashcroft's death, a gang war broke out in the city of Atlanta. Carson's gang and Bronx's engaged in a bloody dogfight that ended with both of the leaders' deaths. Carson was found in a meat crate that had been shipped to Texas while Bronx was tied to his car while it plunged into the river. Yimmen on the other hand had decided to spend his time executing the "big plan." While his lawyers were working out the hotel purchases, Yimmen and his men strolled up to Tim Wayne's house. The gangster and his ten stooges came up to the suburban home. They knocked three times. The door opened. Yimmen and his men were blown away. One of Wayne's men had caught wind of the plan and had warned his boss. So thirty officers were set up around the house while Wayne's family escaped. Only one of Yimmen's men survived but his boss was torn to pieces seconds after the door opened.

The next day, Jim Broth was soundly beaten in election and John Bernstein was reelected mayor. In a matter of days Atlanta's fate was saved. All gangster threat was eliminated and a secure government was reinstated. All because a man's body was found in the sewer.

Historians still wonder to this day who killed Ashcroft and why. Some speculate Yimmen planned it; others, suicide and a few claim that Ashcroft never really died but fled to Cuba, were he lived the rest of his life in peace. But it was ultimately not his life, but his death that had great affect on Atlanta. The city could have been like Chicago under Al Capone. But greed came in the way. Yimmen, Bronx and Carson all had enough to live, but wanted more, so they got death.

Mafia in Atlanta can be dismissed

Atlanta has never been under mob control, especially in the depression era. Atlanta in those days was a city populated by half working-class residents who worked in the cities industries or picked cotton on the outskirts of town. The well established residents had profitable local buisnesses. The only mob affialation with Atlanta if any at all was perhaps the Atlanta Federal Prison. Where Al Capone was imprisoned. The Irish did not have a significant ancestry population in Atlanta until present-day, unless your referring to those in the Mountains. Atlanta was hit extremely hard by the Depression, and at the time there were no Pubs in Atlanta, infact a Pub was unheard of. Rumrunners and moonshiners were the only means of transporting alcohol to area because the city of Atlanta had been dry until 1945. There was no reason to establish a organized crime ring in Atlanta. The city was dominated by Dixiecrats and extreme conservatism. The only type of organized crime ever established was perhaps the Ku Klux Klan and their relations with political leaders of the day. Also, Italian and Irish americans were hated by the local residents, infact Fulton County tried to establish laws segregating those of non-Germanic European Descent (aimed to protect the Anglo-Saxon identity of the region).

Lead

Please shorten the lead to conform to WP:LEAD PDXblazers 04:19, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree. The lead section of this article is too long. Please shorten it to three paragraphs (four paragraphs max). —RJN 05:10, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Main photo

Funny that the article currently uses this photo to lead the article off. That view is from Piedmont Park and I remember when I saw it for the first time, I remarked that you could take a picture from there and somebody might get the illusion that Atlanta is on a major body of water. I personally think the view of the skyline from the North Avenue bridge would be a better choice as it more accurately represents the city (especially if you capture some rush hour traffic on the Downtown Connector) but I'll defer to others if they like the current picture. — GT 02:48, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Climate

Köppen classification

This is valid information and it takes up very little space, so it should be included, but an explanation of the system is not warranted here, as it would fall outside the scope of an article on Atlanta. For anyone who is unfamiliar with it, just go to the appropriate article.

Hotlanta

The previous comment was indeed subjective. It has been changed to something that touches on the topic while providing factual information. 

Atlanta has a higher average summer temperature than Char, NC, so why is it stated the summer is coolerm and NY avg. july temp is a significant 5 deg. below Atlantas.

Nicknames

Never looked at that part of the infobox before, but here's what it says: "The Horizon City, Hotlanta, The Big Peach, A-Town, The ATL". Hotlanta and "The ATL" and even A-Town and Peac (rarely) I've certainly heard, but I'll be removing Horizon City in a few days unless I see an objection: someboy got a cite? Up until 1900 Gate City was the nickname but it doesn't seem necessary to add it here. Jolomo 03:54, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

The 'nicknames' field in the infobox was getting a bit crowded. I've found that this field is quite commonly abused in many city articles. It really should only contain one or two nicknames that are very commonly used, and even "officially" referenced by the city council or convention & visitors' bureau. Nicknames that are briefly coined in a newspaper or personal website should generally be avoided, unless they become very widely used.
I removed 'The Horizon City' from the infobox, and I also added a brief statement on colloquialisms to the introduction, for mention of some of the names that people may have for the city but aren't necessarily 'official'. Currently, 'A-Town' and 'The ATL' are here. The Richmond, Virginia and Albuquerque, New Mexico articles have such a reference, and it seems to have cut down on a lot of the abuse to the nicknames field in the infobox. Dr. Cash 04:05, 7 June 2006 (UTC)


Virtual Tours

I keep posting an external link to a general, voice-narrated virtual tour of Atlanta. Every time I do, somebody removes the link. The virtual tour that was posted does contain various ads cycling through a seperate window on the media player, so I hope this isn't the reason the link is being removed. After all, click on the Yahoo Maps link and you'll see ads. Even the Chamber of Commerce link leads people to the names and contact info for commercial businesses. The virtual tour is relevant, informative and offers this page content it otherwise does not have - something interactive. So, why is the virtual tour link being removed time and time again? Bueller... Bueller...

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Atlanta/Archive_1&oldid=321496986"