Wikipedia

Talk:Houston/Archive 2

< Talk:Houston
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by RJN (talk | contribs) at 00:27, 24 January 2006 (→NPOV). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Latest comment: 19 years ago by RJN in topic NPOV

Archive 1

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Nicknames

Latest comment: 19 years ago14 comments8 people in discussion

Any objections to adding "screwston" to the list of nicknames? I mean, it has as much legitimacy as "H-town"... AFAIK both came from hip-hop. 67.180.27.77 23:08, 23 December 2005 (UTC)TriniTriggs

Yes - I do. I dont think that we need to add suchs a derogitory nickname. --ShakataGaNai 23:09, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
It's not really derogatory. It comes from "screwed" rap music, which just means the record is spun slowly. It's not meant to carry any sexual or disrespectful connotations. 67.180.27.77 23:12, 23 December 2005 (UTC)TriniTriggs
Never really heard of houston refered to as screwston. Byt its possible I'm "out of touch" - is there any references for this nickname? Thats all I wonder. --ShakataGaNai 23:16, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
No references in text, but plenty in the rap scene. The term is carried in an oral tradition (not trying to be silly).67.180.27.77 23:22, 23 December 2005 (UTC)TriniTriggs
I object, if classical music fans named the town "Whoreland" would we consider it an acceptable nickname? Postoak 23:15, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
Well consider this. You may not have ever seriously called Houston "screwston", but a real and substantial cross-section of the population really does use "screwston" with a straight face. To dismiss it as stupid or whatever strikes me as chauvinistic.67.180.27.77 23:19, 23 December 2005 (UTC)TriniTriggs
You should also consider that a real and substantial cross-section of the population does not use or has ever heard of this nickname. Shouldn't we try to use offical nicknames? Postoak 00:30, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

I understand that it's not intended to be offensive, but it would be perceived so by many casual web surfers. If it is included, it should have an explanation following it. That's a bit much for an infobox. I would say leave it out of the infobox, but put it in the body of the article with an explanation of its origin.Rockhopper10r 01:26, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

It is in the body of the article, and has been there for some time now...see "A cosmopolitan city" Postoak 04:26, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

I have never heard of this either. In my opinion, we should only stick with "Space City" and "Bayou City". Adding "H-Town" in there wasn't appropriate either. I or any of the people I encountered don't refer to Houston as "H-Town". "H-Town" is slang and is not even American English. It is only used by a certain subgroup/subculture in their music or rather, trash talk. I am going to remove "H-Town" since the general or civilized population do not refer to Houston as that, therefore it is not legitimate. We shouldn't have street talk/slang languages or phrases in an encylopedia. RJN 01:31, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

The nickname of H-Town I believe comes from when the Arena Theatre (located off of the Southwest Freeway) was renamed to the H-Town Arena Theatre. I have lived in Houston for 36 years and only in the last two or three of I actually heard the name H-Town to refer to Houston. Nevertheless, I would give it legitamacy has a nickname for Houston. James084 01:49, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
Lots of folks use H-town colloquially. I restored it. · Katefan0(scribble)/mrp 05:44, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
I don't hear it often, but it seems to be gaining credence especially with out of towners for some reason. I am with Katefan on this one. EasilyAmused 07:12, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Fattest City

Latest comment: 19 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Houston is no longer the "fattest city" according to Men's Fitness magazine. I feel that we should remove the 2005 ranking and the doughnut comments and replace with something more appropriate. Do we even want to update with the 2006 ranking? Postoak 01:19, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree with removing the "fattest city" status from the article. What is the 2006 ranking like and is it available? RJN 06:54, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
I agree, it should just be removed. Out of curiosity, what's now #1? · Katefan0(scribble)/mrp 07:20, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
The rankings are here: http://www.mensfitness.com/rankings/358?page=2. Houston moved to #5 while Chicago moves to first place. I will remove the ranking, will maybe replace this subsection with something more positive later. Postoak 20:53, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Userbox

Latest comment: 19 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I made a Houston userbox. It is at {{User Houston}}. I used Chicago's template to make it. :) WhisperToMe 02:21, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Woo! (runs to add) · Katefan0(scribble)/mrp 02:39, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

NPOV

Latest comment: 19 years ago7 comments4 people in discussion

This article reads like a brochure from the Houston chamber of commerce: "Known for the vibrancy of its visual and performing arts, Houston's Theater District is ranked second in the country in the number of theatre seats in a concentrated downtown area per capita and has world-class visual arts... The city is also close to sunny beaches as well as one of the United States' largest concentrations of pleasure boats and tourist attractions... Houston has much to offer, including the lowest cost of living and the least-expensive housing among 27 major U.S. metropolitan areas with populations of more than 1.7 million." If you didn't catch it the first time: "Houston is widely recognized as the nation's third most important city for contemporary visual arts..." More effusive adjectives: "renowned", "world powerhouse", "vibrancy", "international". The Texas Medical Center is "internationally-renowened" and the skyline is "the third largest in the country". Even the freeways are "heavily traveled," not congested. It turns out highway construction and gridlock aren't quality of life problems like in other cities, but exist "to meet the demands of continuing growth." This isn't informative, this is relentless boosterism. Mfk91 06:16, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

RJN's response to Mfk91

The phrase "Houston is widely recognized as the nation's third most important city for contemporary visual arts..." is not anywhere in the article—you made this one up. How is the phrase "The city also has the third largest skyline in the country (after New York City and Chicago)..." read like a brochure? This statement is a fact, not an opinion, so I don't know why you are disputing it.

Houston is well known for its visual and performing arts. Have you ever been to Houston? The information regarding the Theater District ranking second of theater seats in a concentrated downtown area came from the Houston Theater District website, not the Chamber of Commerce. The information is also a fact, not an opinion or a guess.

This article has been through a lot for it to be what it is today. I have been actively involved in editing this article since May 17, 2005 in hoping one day it will be a featured article. By "being through a lot," I meant that this article has been edited and copyedited by many people—a lot of information were added/revised/re-written. This article went under a major copyedit by Katefan0 last summer and she had done a great job rewording the majority of the text for style, grammar, and for NPOV. Later on last fall, Katefan0 had another copyedit session of this article. After all this, I don't see how this article could be written by the Chamber of Commerce or sounded like it came from one since it has been edited/copyedited so many times.

Houston is close the beaches with a short travel to Galveston Island. Again, this is a fact, not an opinion. Downtown Houston is about 40 miles or so away from Galveston Island, etc. Why would this sound like it came from the Chamber of Commerce? On the southeast side of Houston, there are many tourist attractions such as the Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center (where Mission Control is located), NASA, Kemah Boardwalk, Clear Lake, etc. Pleasure boats are found on this side of town. How are these facts boosterism? Shouldn't the truth be told about certain attractions that this area has to offer?

It is possible that other websites online copied information from here—it is very common for this to happen. I have found a lot of websites that copied and pasted articles from Wikipedia to their website. Can you tell me where you found this information to be from the Chamber of Commerce? There is also no such thing as the "Houston Chamber of Commerce" as I searched Google. There happen to be many Chamber of Commerce in the Houston area by geographic area, but not a "Houston Chamber of Commerce." I looked up some of the Houston area Chamber of Commerce websites by area and I did not find any information that is similar to information here in the Houston article. So can you give me some proof that this was written by the "Houston Chamber of Commerce" (as there is no such thing as one) and provide a website to this "Houston Chamber of Commerce." If not, I will remove the POV-section templates and do some re-writting/re-wording when time permits. I would like to know what brochure has information from this article. If you have time, you should study the edit history from the summer time to see that phrases of this article has been edited and copyedited many times—there is no way it can be from the "Houston Chamber of Commerce" (doesn't exist) as you claimed.

Regarding the "Transportation" section (freeways and how they are "heavily travelled," etc.), I don't have a comment for it because I really haven't mess with that section ever since I edited this article from May 17, 2005 to present. Maybe other editors such as WhisperToMe, Katefan0, Urban909, SaltyKid, and Rangerdude could comment on it—they contributed and made copyedits to this section since I have been here from what I can recall.

Regards,

RJN 10:36, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Houston's chamber of commerce is called The Greater Houston Partnership . Rockhopper10r 14:05, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
After reviewing www.houston.org, I didn't find any similar materials from this article on that website. This article does not sound like it came from or written by the chamber of commerce. RJN 18:40, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
I second RJN's statements. I would add "ranked number 2 according to the Theater District" or something like that. Maybe number 2 in size or ticket sales... And yes, Houston's freeways are the arteries and veins of the city. WhisperToMe 23:38, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
You utterly missed the point. Of course this article is not literally plagarized from The Greater Houston Partnership or any other such promotional organization. That is not the point. The point is that the tone of this article is a sales pitch by some group of city fathers. It is not a dispassionate encylopedia article. All this gushing about pleasure boats and renowned attractions is of course grounded in factually correct information. So too would be an article singing the virtues of chocolate, citing statistics of its enduring popularity through the ages, scientific studies demonsrating that it releases pleasure hormones, and so on. Perhaps it would be factually accurate, but it would obviously not be telling the whole story. What about health effects? Cholesterol? Labor conditions on third-world coccoa plantations? Covering the subject straightforwardly, without hype, is the mission of a sound encyclopedic article. Yet instead of soberly offering the reader insight about the city of Houston, this article reads like a travel brochure. The "Government & Politics" section tells us little about the city's political parties, organizations and important controversies (aside from term limits), but instead tells us "Houston is one of the fastest growing major cities in the United States and the largest without zoning laws." More boosterism. Factually true, yes; comprehensive, no. Contrast it with the government section of the Salt Lake City article: concise summary of the city's government structure, an explanation of politically important issues in the city, a quick review of the platforms of the city's political parties, and a conclusion describing locally significant policies of the mayor and the city's overall political disposition. Similarly constrast the Salt Lake article's balanced treatment of education, which summarizes the mormon's historic commitment to education, the city's underfunding of the public school system and the concomitant problems, and finally noting that the Univ. of Utah is known for its work in computer graphics. The Houston article, by contrast, simply dwells on size. Rice "boast(s) one of the largest financial endowments of any university in the world," the "University of Houston System (is) the largest urban state system of higher education in the Gulf Coast," etc. We have no idea what challenges these institutions face, what achievements they've made, or even why being "the largest urban state system of higher education in the Gulf Coast" matters (how many other "urban state systems of higher education" are there in the region to begin with?). There's no mention of the extremely serious funding problems faced by public primary and secondary school districts. No mention of controversies over bi-lingual or English-only education. I could go on and on. The statistic from the Theater District about number of seats gives the impression that Houston has a theater scene second in the nation only to New York. Oh? I suppose Las Vegas doesn't sell as many tickets, or that Chicago's theater isn't more nationally influential? About Houston's freeways, they indeed are the arteries and veins of the city, but that is a more complex fact. The Los Angeles article very fairly discusses the social and environmental consequences of that city's freeway system, but no such word is found in the Houston article. Take a look at the Salt Lake City article for an idea about tone and NPOV. Regarding your allegation that I made up "Houston (is) widely recognized as the nation's third most important city for contemporary visual arts," have a look at the 4th sentence under "Cultural institutions." Not only is the sentence as it appears grammatically flawed, but it is a prime example of this article's problem. Who widely recognizes, and according to what criteria, such a subjective claim? Some arts group with a vested interest, like the Theater District? This article is a puff piece from start to finish. Mfk91 00:08, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Let me educate you with something here: In Texas, municipal elections are nonpartisan! There is no way we can talk about "platforms of the city's political parties" like other non-Texas articles. Things are different down here in Texas. Not all places have the same function or goverment. RJN 00:27, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Houston/Archive_2&oldid=36432176"