Talk:Carbondale, Illinois
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Illinois, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Illinois on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale. |
Contents |
[edit] Updating Carbondale, IL
I'm preparing to update [actually, have updated] the Wiki article on Carbondale, IL, specifically the section on "Reveling and Activism." These two terms apparently were paired together only because they were both linked with street disorders in past decades; I think they should be treated separately. And we are now more than 35 years away from the events of 1970; Carbondale now has a proud tradition of (peaceful) political activism that is more relevant in a contemporary encyclopedia article. Likewise the good, the bad, and the ugly of Carbondale's erstwhile Halloween celebration are slipping deeper into the past, farther from relevance in an encyclopedia article that seeks to characterize the city as it is.
I have replacement drafts written [and installed]: A 91-word section on (contemporary, peaceful) activism, and a 75-word summary of today's yearly festivals.
I think Wiki's neutral-viewpoint policy justifies some revisions to tone down the section's present focus on violence and disorder.
I would also like to add [actually, have added] a section, "Culture," about some of the unique cultural ("with both large and small C") institutions and activities in today's Carbondale. My draft is 193 words long.
Kotabatubara 20:00, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- Please be sure to use reliable sources and the cite them. The "reveling" section has historically been a high vandalism target and what is there now, at least the last time I checked, is backed by the campus newspaper articles linked. It seemed to be the only free source and though it is probably biased toward the university, I tried to stick to the facts available. I don't support removal of the reveling material completely as it was national news for several years. A paragraph seems adequate, but I wouldn't want it to be much less than that. I also oppose total removal of the 1970s riots, they are notable historically regardless of current activism. --Dual Freq 23:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
I have some misgivings about the restored material on the Halloween violence in Carbondale in 2000. In removing those details, I was not trying to whitewash the city's reputation. But, for one thing, the degree of detail (the number of arrests, and the _individual from Danville_, in particular!) seemed more appropriate to a news report than to an encyclopedia article. See Wiki's policy on "Neutral point of view", and its admonition to avoid what it calls a "sensationalist" bias, defined as "favoring the exceptional over the ordinary".
(To find that definition, on the Main_Page, first column, under "interaction", click "About Wikipedia". In that article, scroll down to the "Contents" box, and click "3.2 Wikipedia content criteria". On that page, click "2. Wikipedia:Neutral point of view". On that page, again scroll down to the "Contents" box and click "1.2 Bias". On that page, find "Sensationalist" in the list.)
Note that leaving the details out of the Wiki article would not mean they were lost to history; in the version that I provided, the curious reader can find them by following the link to the Daily Egyptian article that is referenced.
My second misgiving about the restored material is that it seems to hold a magnifying glass up to one negative episode in the city's history, presenting it far out of proportion with other aspects that characterize the city. We don't need to deny that those things happened, but it seems inappropriate and even unfair for them to dominate the characterization of the city, where, after all, many other, positive, things are happening nowadays.
I'd like to suggest that we consult some neutral third parties and ask them how much detail about specific incidents they feel belongs in an encyclopedia article about a place.
Kotabatubara 03:10, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
We seem to have a dispute about what should be included in the article on Carbondale, IL. Reverting to previous text is not the solution, and is counter to Wiki policy. Before submitting a "Request for Comment" (RfC) to the Wiki page on "Requests for comment/History and geography", I would like to see if we can come to agreement on the nature of our disagreement. Wiki policy says "Do not post an RfC before working towards a resolution with other article contributors first."
Here is a draft of a description of the disagreement. Is it accurate?
In an article about a city (Carbondale, Illinois), we have a disagreement about how much detail on negative historical events is consistent with the Neutral Point of View policy. Kotabatubara 14:25, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] need photos
Need photos of Carbondale! Boromir's Regret 21:51, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] pop data
Two different population figures were found in the text, and so I removed the one that read some twenty-nine thousand souls in 2006. This figure didn't have a citation. Boromir's Regret 21:57, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] transportation
hey! how about some respect for the c-dale greyhound station?? those fellas put up with a helluva alot. and a helluva alot more than amtrak. shhhiiit. plus they operate in the hood. it takes mad skill to run an honest business across the street from the cadillac lounge. with all them "neked" women runnin up in there all hours of the night. and during the sunlight hours they got the hippies runnin up on em being all like "hey, whoa, support my cause. this is unjust, that is unjust. donate to our black scarf fund..." i mean, shit, it's surprising that those guys make any profit at all, let alone the shameful amount they did. do. i mean, i'm juss sayin, this wikipedia is sposed to be all fair handed n shit, how bout a little even handed coverage??
[edit] photo problems
Is anyone else seeing this? Murderbike (talk) 17:55, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
