Jump to content

Talk:Greenville, North Carolina

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good article nomineeGreenville, North Carolina was a Geography and places good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 2, 2008Good article nomineeNot listed


Untitled

[edit]

Changed PAX to i.

Air service?

[edit]

According to the US Airways online timetable, the carrier only serves Charlotte from Greenville, not Philadelphia.

History?

[edit]

Not even the Greenville Massacre?

Yeah, without a History section, it's just a tourist guide. Murderbike 18:55, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What was the Greenville Massacre? I wasn't able to find anything by googling it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.171.208.27 (talk) 19:16, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"The Greenville Massacre" is more commonly known as the Tulsa Massacre. Greenville was the name of the neighborhood, it has no relation to Greenville NC whatsoever. 149.168.204.10 (talk) 14:11, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Just FYI, the neighborhood associated with the Tulsa Massacre was "Greenwood," not "Greenville" (see Tulsa race massacre). Igoe-Matthew (talk) 14:34, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Subdivisions

[edit]

the subdivisions listed on this page are hardly new; Brooke Valley is one of the oldest subdivisions in the county, and Camelot is over 25 years old if not more! This is an odd choice of subdivisions to list, is there any logic to them?

Good article?

[edit]

I've been working on the article and hopefully it gets considered a WP:GA. --AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 13:14, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Review

[edit]

The article's prose appears to be reasonably well written, and from that perspective meets the "well written" criteria of WP:WIAGA. However, the article is not complete, and there are too many very short sections in the article, or missing sections, that the article fails the "completeness" requriement of the Good Article criteria.

  • The geography section is far too short; missing entirely is information on the cityscape (neighborhoods and how they are connected) and weather/climate.
  • The Demographics section has a 'template being considered for deletion' tag in it. The text itself is sufficient, but is nothing more than auto-generated data added by a bot from the 2000 census. It could be expanded with more information about the population, including population history, and more information about where various immigrant communities originated from.
  • Promote the history section. It should be the first section in the article, after the lead. Most city articles look best with the following order: History, Geography, Demographics, Economy.
Merge the 'hurricane floyd' section from its own main section into the history section. It's obviously an important part of the city's history, but shouldn't be in a main section, and belongs with 'history', since it's historical fact.
Completed on October 21st, 2008 Harmonychurch (talk) 02:02, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • A section on the economy is entirely missing from the article. This should cover the various industries and businesses in the city. Should be more than just a list of corporations.
  • The education section is just a list of schools. More can be said about this. Talk about how the schools are related and include information on the school district(s), total number of students/teachers in the system, any notable schools (governor's schools, or highly ranked schools). Any teachers of the year, other notable education achievements? Include information about the library system here.
Move education closer to the end of the article, and promote the 'culture' and 'sports/recreation' sections.
  • Move 'health care' into a subsection within an 'infrastructure' main section. This section should also have information about other important infrastructure in the town, such as electricity generation and water supply.
  • The 'culture' section looks like a very good start, but it just doesn't seem complete. It sounds like it's missing something? I'm not sure what, but I think more about the local culture and tourist attractions can be included here.
  • The section 'LGBT life in Greenville' is an WP:NPOV violation if included in its own main section, as it adds extra emphasis to a very small aspect of the city's population. It's culturally related, and if mentioned, should probably be included within that section. But usually, individual nightclubs (whether gay or straight), are generally not considered noteworthy enough to be included, and borders on advertisement/spam. The link to this material also does not meet wikipedia's reliable source guidelines, as it looks like mostly a blog site with very little, if any, editorial control.
  • The 'shopping' section is of very little importance, and should be moved into the 'culture' section and greatly reduced. Wikipedia should not advertise the existence of stores and malls, and stores like J.C. Penney, unless their HQ is in the city, is hardly worth a mention. Some shopping centers that might be worthwhile to mention in the article might be a street in town with a lot of historic shops, that has developed through many years.
  • Since there are no real major league, professional sports in this city, it might be better to change the title of the 'sports' section to 'sports and recreation', and add more about the recreational activities available in the city. Are there hiking and nature trails located nearby? What about city parks? Any state parks?
  • 'Transportation' is very short. Seems like it can be expanded. It really just lists, in prose format, the major transportation options available, like highways, without really talking about how they relate to the community. There's no context for where these highways lead to and how they're connected to other cities. What about rail transport?
  • The media section seems ok, although try not to just list radio and television stations. The list of radio stations looks incomplete, with only 3 AM & 3 FM stations. The list of TV stations looks incomplete as well (no ABC or NBC affiliates?). You might want to try talking about the radio & TV as prose, instead of listing, and discuss how this relates to the overall cultural scene. What Nielsen media market is Greenville in, and how does this rank compared to other markets (viewership)? Also, if written very well, the different aspects (print, radio, tv) could be weaved together better into a single main section, without the use of these subsections.
Promote the media section -- move closer to 'culture'.
  • A section on 'government' is completely missing from the article. Probably should appear closer to the end.
  • Move the 'external links' section to the very last section, after 'references'. There's a link to the 'Mapit-US-cityscale' template at the very end of the article that can actually be removed now. These links originally appeared in 'external links', but the link to geographic coordinates now appears at the very top right, as well as in the geography sections, so it's redundant at the end.
  • The 'references' listed need to contain more than just the external link to the source. They should include full citation information: author, title, publisher, date of publication, date URL retrieved (if it's an online source). This is important, especially for online sources, so that if the URL ever is not accessible, the source is not rendered useless and readers can still verify the content cited.

For additional help, I would recommend looking at WP:LEAD, WP:MOS, and WP:CITE. WikiProject Cities also has a very good guideline for US city articles that you may want to take a look at. Two city articles that are existing GAs are also worth examining: Richmond, Virginia and Flagstaff, Arizona.

Hope this helps! Good luck! Dr. Cash (talk) 18:18, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dowdy ficklen.jpg Nominated for Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:Dowdy ficklen.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 01:18, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Factual errors

[edit]

There are large factual errors regarding the metro area of Greenville, NC. I have tried to delete the erroneous information, but my deletions have been overridden (by Wikipedia's editorial staff?). Neither the metro area, nor the metro population could possibly be more than double the City population. Just take a look at Google maps if you don't believe me. There's no conurbation of any consequence within miles of Greenville. Also, the Wikipedia article for Pitt County, in which Greenville is situated, shows a smaller population, but slightly bigger area than the Greenville metro area, so there are discrepancies between the two Wikipedia articles. Right now I don't have the time to make a full correction, using 2010 census data, so I deleted the clearly erroneous metro area data from the Greenville article. No facts are better than bad facts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.170.238.175 (talk) 02:48, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted the comments as they are inappropriate in an article...that is what this page is for. Your deletions have not been reverted as I write this. You may find it handy to use the markup {{cn}} just after a fact that you think needs a citation to support it.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 03:24, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.170.238.175 (talk) 03:46, 18 April 2012 (UTC) I have reluctantly left in place the population data for the metro area, and the urban area. It is in agreement with the 2010 census data, but in my opinion, and that of Greenville residents that I know,the numbers are artifacts, and quite meaningless. The Greenville Statistical Metro Area comprises two largely rural counties that may only contain one incorporated city - Greenville.67.170.238.175 (talk) 23:36, 1 November 2012 (UTC)67.170.238.175 (talk) 00:06, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DEAR JAMES WHIAKER JR SEE COME HOME IMISS YOU MARCH TOO WISH SISSTER BROTHER RAIN WINDY STROM LIGHTER THUGERN AND AND LATTER SENDING TEXTING MAIL FAMILY 9192188655 PHONE CALL I SEDNING YOU AND TALKING PHOTER FISH THANKING YOU ABOUT AND WORRY DREAM ABOUT NIGH AND SEDNING TEXTING THANK YOU — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.85.228.129 (talk) 17:39, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 6 external links on Greenville, North Carolina. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:22, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Greenville, North Carolina. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:33, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Greenville, North Carolina. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:11, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Greenville, North Carolina. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:55, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Greenville, North Carolina. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:15, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Greenville, North Carolina

[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Greenville, North Carolina's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "USCensusEst2017":

  • From Rowan County, North Carolina: "Population and Housing Unit Estimates". Retrieved June 4, 2018.
  • From Clayton, North Carolina: https://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/PEP/2017/PEPANNRES/0400000US37.16200. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
  • From Raleigh, North Carolina: "American FactFinder". Retrieved May 26, 2018.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 14:27, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:21, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:36, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Greenville,_North_Carolina&oldid=1207437834"