Talk:Detroit/Archive 3

Urban Blight/Undeserved Reputation

I could not agree more with Fuzzytek about the photograph. I was born in this city in 1946 in the state's oldest hospital. At that time it was called St. Mary's, but was changed to Detroit Memorial. It was established as the Territorial Hospital, prior to Michigan's statehood, 1837. Some years ago, just before it was torn down, one of the weekly newspaper magazines featured the hospital's history. Very interesting, it had nurses' log books, many of which were accounts of care given to wounded Civil War soldiers. After I have researched some dates, I intend to fill in some of the blanks of city history. My paternal grandparents can loosely trace our roots to the first settlers who came here with Cadillac, long before there were thirteen colonies. I did spend most of the seventies in Southern California, so I missed most of the "White Flight," and had to view the bussing argument from a distance. We moved back to this city in 1977, and were shocked to see the changes.

In the ealy nineties Zev Chavitz' wrote a book, "Devil's Night and Other True Tales of Detroit." It's subtitle, "The City that Burns Itself", certainly makes it look like a horrible place. Chavitz lived in this city for a few years, and then went back to Israel to write it. Fuzzytek is quite correct at fixing the blame on slum lords neglecting their properties, to the point that many of them had them torched on "Devil's Night", to collect the insurance money. There has been a "Devils night in the Metro area all my life. We would throw rotten tomatoes and eggs at neigbors' houses we did not like. One of our favorite pranks was to put some fresh dog poop in a paper bag, light it on fire, and ring the doorbell. We got a big laugh hiding in the bushes watching the homeowner stomp out the fire and then tracking doggie poo into his living room carpet!

Many, if not most, of the other houses torched on Devil's Night were done by neighbors who had given up on the homeowner, or the city, doing anything about squatters who settled into unsecured houses, making them into "shooting galleries", "Crack Houses", or places to lure their children, in order to drug and rape them. The worst year for "Devil's Night was 1984, shortly after the Detroit Tigers won the World Series. The famous picture of a young man standing in front of an overturned, flaming car, may well be in Chavetz' book. It has never been published that the White Boy in the picture did not live in the city, and had nothing to do with the car, except as a "photo oppportunity" when he saw a press photographer with a camera.

The last time there was more arson on Devil's Night than on any other night, was 1987. For many years the city has had "Angel's Night," which consists of large numbers of neighborhood volunteers who report possible criminal activities, in addition to police overtime, to arrest criminals and apprehend young people who are in curfew violation.

Chavetz is not the only reporter who left Detroit without giving it a pretty hard and undeserved knock. Ti Wa Chang worked at a local T.V. station for a few years, and then caught on as a network reporter. He came back on "special assignment", during the tenure of Coleman Young. The mayor agreed to an interview with the stipulation that there would be no questions about an ongoing investigation. He interviewed the mayor for almost ninety minutes, and then asked the question which he had previously agreed he would not do. Naturally, the only clip of the interview which was nationally-broadcast, was Coleman's BALLISTIC reaction, with the curse words bleeped.

Detroit has the reputation of being "Murder City", yet Washington D.C. and Atlanta Ga, have usually been more aptly named. A doctor friend of mine was on a beach in Italy. One of the locals asked him where he was from. When he answered, "Detroit", they guy said, "Si, Detroit!", and then held his hands out to simulate firing a machine gun.

My wife and I rode the Greyhound out to California. In Chicago, we picked up four young men, 16-19yrs. old. They were a rap group, "War Zone", who were being sent to Los Angeles to record their first album for Epic Records. Although what little of their raps we heard were all about "hoes", drugs, and murder, their mommas raised them to be true gentlemen. They addressed us as ma'am and sir, held our seats for us, and played cards with us most of the trip to Las Vegas. Maybe some of this was based on, "Be nice to that old White dude, he's from DETROIT!" In the sixties, I was stationed near Chicago, and even back then, there were Chicago neighborhoods where I would not drive my car in the day time.

While there are some parts of this city that I am ill-advised to walk alone at night, most of the city, especially downtown, is perfectly safe any time. The only crimes I have seen are hookers plying their wares, people trying to sell me "hot" merchandise, an ocassional drug deal, or "Hey man, got a quarter/cigarette?" I believe a check of the FBI Uniform Crime Statistics will show that one is more likely to be mugged in ANY Detroit suburb. When we watch the news, most of the drug busts and holdups are in the suburbs. Of course on the news it is almost ALWAYS, "In The Detroit Area."--W8IMP 02:57, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I did check the FBI stats ([4]): Property crimes in Detroit in 2004 were over 6,279 per 100,000 while the highest reported rate in a suburb was 5,050 - the others were even lower. Rmhermen 23:06, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry guy, Chicago is no way near as bad as Detroit. Since Chicago is over 3 times as large as Detroit, it would have to have over 3 times the crime just to be considered EQUAL in the crime rate, and it doesn't have that. That's not meant to come down hard on Detroit, but don't use Chicago as a defense for Detroit. Chicago is very beautiful.

Rmhermen, Thank you for checking FBI Uniform Crime statistics, but there is a flaw in your implication that mugging is the only "property" crime. I said that one is more likely to be mugged, and I challenge anyone to dispute my contention. W8IMP 02:04 , 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Please refer to this article from NPR - Detroit struggles to Overcome Urban Blight http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4254620

If you have a more fitting photo of urban blight—then replace the image.—MJCdetroit 14:55, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Rmherman, your description is accurate to my experience. I was born in 1947 and went through much of what you describe. However, the part that is often left out is the changes that happened after the riots in 1967. I had graduated from Cass Tech in 1964, having taken the Second Ave bus to school all times of the day and night without fear. I then went to Wayne State. After the riots, there was 'fortress' mentality that struck that, to this day, has made Detroit one of the most defensive areas I have ever lived in or traveled through. Furthermore, it is experiencing a renaissance of the cultural arts that has been characterized by new developments downtown, the renewal of Woodward avenue in the downtown area, and more concerts, plays, and operas than ever. Highland Park has also seen new development althought the pull out of Chrysler has wreaked its havoc on the economy. THe original Sears building was torn down and finally a new development is going to happen (this thanks to Devco, Highland Park Development Corporation, under the leadership of Harriet Saperstein).

More to my story is the fact that I received a stunning education in the public schools and at Wayne State. I went on to Stanford and have a most successful career as a musician and in business in healthcare. All, I attribute to richness of the life I had (which, of course I did not appreciate until I was old enough!). My brother, who is a successful attorney in San Francisco, also went to Cass TEch, Wayne State, and WSU LAw School. THe diversity in the population...the richness of the African American culture, the many varieties of European cultures, also has formed my world view.

Yes, crime is a problem, but so is poverty and so it the low tax base on which the Detroit kids are supported. Crime is a symptom, as it is in most Urban areas. I can say that I also gave Detroit a bad rap as I defiantly left for the West. However, I have now had years to look back in gratitude..and I go back often to try to return some of what I received.Healhealth 14:24, 22 March 2007 (UTC)Susan Mazer(healhealth)

Though totally unrelated, I believe the only solution to all these blight and crime is developemnt. Someone has to develop it before dust and fires (Devils' Night?) do... I don't know, who? Los Angeles has its own empty lots in Watts too while as stated below and Newark and Baltimore has an exodus of people too. Ruennsheng 13:36, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Detroit Reaching the World Via the Internet

Much of Detroit's revitalization is built upon its ability to keep pace with ever-changing internet technologies. The World Wide Web has not only connected Detroit to the international community, but allowed for more robust business growth within the city itself. As Detroit moves to promote its advancements locally and around the globe, it will be well represented by the sheer volume and variety of websites dedicated to its progressive businesses. Several prominent manifestations of Detroit's online presence are frequently visited sites such as [5], [6], and [7]. These, among other popular Detroit destinations, deliver a message that the new Detroit can, and will, remain a viable metropolitan city whose reach truly extends far and wide. Its roots founded in a unique American history and its future promoted via a strong internet presence.

Community message boards such as [8] offer Detroiters an open forum for discussing views on city policies. Such sites also provide interesting historical information on the evolution of the city and the people instrumental to its growth as a famous American city.

Greensboro55 14:26, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

What you say above may be true, but it doesn't alter Wikipedia's external link policy. -- Mwanner | Talk 21:18, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

outdated

4th largest urban area?

"It is the focus city of the nation's tenth-largest metropolitan area, and the fourth-largest if Windsor and its environs are included." This does not make any sense at all! How can it be be 4th largest in THE nation (ie the USA) if that figure includes part of Canada? Another nation? I suggest the original poster rewrite this to clarify what they mean, or that the reference to "4th largest" simply be dropped altogether. unsigned on 20:35, 1 October 2006 by 210.66.152.110

Maybe they meant 4th in North America. --MJCdetroit 03:18, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Still doesn't make any logical sense. Windsor, Canada cannot be considered part of Detroit's metro area. Just as Bellingham, in Washington state, does not contribute to Vancouver's metro area, Windsor does not contribute to Detroit's. What about Ciudad Juarez in Mexico and the US environs? Tijuana-San Diego? I am removing this statement.unsigned byUser:154.5.30.192

It certainly contributes to Detroit. It is the busiest border crossing with Canada. Many Canadians work in the Detroit area. International metro areas are sometimes considered. Try googling "metro area Tijuana-San Diego population". Rmhermen 03:32, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I have seen both Detroit and Windsor considered together as a metro area in the past. However, you maybe justified in removing the statement because there is not a reference for it. --MJCdetroit 03:39, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

The World Gazetteer includes Detroit-Windsor on its list of U.S. metropolitan areas, although they show it as only the ninth largest. San Diego-Tijuana comes twelth, and Buffalo-St Catharines comes 35th, but Vancouver-Bellingham isn't listed. -- Avenue 09:05, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Vancouver is a Canadian city, so it wouldn't be listed. Yes, this is a double standard, but is irrelevant because the "World Gazetteer" is wrong to include Windsor, St. Catharines and Tijuana in the first place. What authority does this website have anyway? I couldn't find any references or citations. These places are, at best, urban agglomerations that span international boundaries and not metropolitan areas. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.6.233.239 (talk) .

A metropolitan areas is simply an urban agglomeration. It has no legal standing or powers. A metropolitan area is not a municipality. Rmhermen 22:47, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

According to this page, Detroit's metro area is the 10th largest in the US. --Awiseman 14:01, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Rmhermen: You are absolutely wrong in your definition of a metropolitan area. Even Wikipedia states: A metropolitan area is a large population center consisting of a large city and its adjacent zone of influence, or of several neighboring cities or towns and adjoining areas, with one or more large cities serving as its hub or hubs. Detroit is NOT Windsor's hub nor is Windsor directly in Detroit's sphere of influence. An urban agglomeration is not a metropolitan area. Please get real! I dare you to find one Windsor resident that considers Windsor a part of Metropolitan Detroit. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.6.233.239 (talk) .

Anonymous unsigned user- The cities are adjacent, that automatically means they're part of the same metropolitan area. It's like Minneapolis and St. Paul. See the definition on Metropolitan area - "A metropolitan area is a large population center consisting of a large city and its adjacent zone of influence, or of several neighboring cities or towns and adjoining areas, with one or more large cities serving as its hub or hubs." --Awiseman 18:04, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Awiseman: your own definition eliminates Windsor as part of Detroit's metro area... Detroit is not Windsor's hub. It is not a "bedroom community" to the downtown, and it is in no way dependent on the economic and cultural well-being of the neighbouring city. Also, before you point to St. Paul/ Minneapolis, in case you haven't noticed Windsor is in a different, autonomous country. Windsor does not exist because Detroit is accross the river! An urban agglomoration (or is it conglomeration? I never get that right) and metropolitan area are not one and the same! 207.6.233.239 19:41, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

It says "hub or hubs"! There can be two hubs, Detroit and Windsor. And it doesn't matter if they're in different countries if people travel back and forth. It's not as if there's an impregnable wall between them. --Awiseman 19:46, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually Windsor does exists exactly because Detroit is across the river. When the French farmers ran out of room on the Detroit side of the river they started setting up farms on the Windsor side. Rmhermen 19:58, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

And furthermore, check out these links, some from Canadian sites and scientists, which consider Detroit and Windsor one metro area. These were all quickly found on Google. [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] --Awiseman 20:09, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

This is slightly off subject, but kinda related because it demonstrates the unique connection between Detroit and Windsor and I will tried to find a source for this. I read somewhere that because of Windsor's closeness to Detroit (and not just the distance) that the media in Windsor is exempt from the 'Canadian Content' requirement. If you listen to Windsor based 89X or 93.9 –the river– they refer to themselves as "Windsor/Detroit's ...". They also give weather and traffic infomation in Fahrenheit and miles only. The another Windsor station CKLW AM800 says that it gives local (Windsor) news first but they also have stories concerning Detroit and their weather forecast is given in Celsius but they will say the current temperature in both Fahrenheit and Celsius. CKLW also happens to be the AM home for University of Michigan football. Just a thought. MJCdetroit 20:41, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

A metropolitan area and an urban agglomeration are not the same thing! A metropolitan area is an urbanized area with a free-flow of people, goods and services centred around one or more hubs. Detroit is NOT the hub for Windsor (I've made this point above, but it has gone unoticed or misunderstood). It is NOT a part of Metro Detroit no matter what self-serving marketing materials and radio stations may do to expand markets. By the same token, no part of Metro Detroit has Windsor as a hub. There is a clear economic, social and political divison- two separate metro areas. Yes, there is a strong link between the two cities in spite of the international border. Yes, there is an urban agglomeration that includes both Detroit and Windsor (and I do not dispute using that as a basis for the population figures in the article). The following Stats Canada website gives a good definition of a metropolitan area: http://www40.statcan.ca/z01/cs0007_e.htm. I haven't changed the text in the article, in spite of the fact that all citations (...or lack of) are very weak... I'll leave that up to future readers.207.6.233.239 00:32, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Your definition have not provern your point nor have you shown us any reason to believe that urban agglomeration is different than metropolitan area. Rmhermen 02:38, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

It's undeniably true that unofficially, Detroit and Windsor often get lumped together in many (not all) people's minds as a single metropolitan area, but it's also true that neither the Canadian nor American governments officially treats them as such. A metropolitan area is not just any agglomeration of communities you care to draw a box around; it's an agglomeration of communities within precise boundaries specifically defined as a metropolitan area by the appropriate census-taking body. Thus, since neither the Canadian nor American census bureaux officially define Detroit/Windsor as a single metropolitan area, I'd suggest that Wikipedia doesn't either — we really ought stick to the verifiable and official figures and definitions rather than inventing demographic jurisdictions that have no actual standing in law. Bearcat 02:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

You're all wrong. First, a city does not have to be a 'suburb' to be part of a metro area: San Francisco-Oakland. Second, Windsor is unofficially part of the Detroit metro area but should not be counted in statements such as '4th in the U.S.' because it includes places outside the U.S. And '4th in North America' wouldn't work because then you'd have to include places like Mexico City. Oops.

So, yes, Detroit gets shortchanged due to international border issues...but so do cities with small city-limit population boundaries. Tough.68.211.77.10 12:05, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

IPA pronunciation

The current pronunciation listed is: [dɪˈtʰɹɔɪt]. Is that a bit narrow? Do we need to show aspiration and the upside-down "r"? [dɪ'trɔɪt] is a bit more readable for the average user, and anyone who cares enough about English phonology would realize that those details are implied. Bamos 23:35, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I have downloaded all the fonts I could find and still see mostly empty boxes there. I doubt that it matters at all to the average user what we put there - they won't see it. Now if we could get a sound file of the American English pronunciation that would be great. Rmhermen 01:03, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

I just noticed that only one pronounciation is mentioned. We need to discuss the fact the natives often pronounce the city name differently than the common pronounciation. De' troit instead of d@ troit (different first vowel and stress). Rmhermen 14:32, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

You should hear how the Hockey night in Canada announcers say it. DaTroooyt. —MJCdetroit 14:43, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Our late mayor, Coleman Young, pronounced it "D'trowit."--W8IMP 03:04, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

And the next two mayors, including the present one, pronounce it "citiovdetroit".69.222.55.140 06:31, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Survey on proposal to make U.S. city naming guidelines consistent with others countries

There is a survey in progress at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (settlements) to determine if there is consensus on a proposed change to the U.S. city naming conventions to be consistent with other countries, in particular Canada.

This proposal would allow for this article to be located at Detroit instead of Detroit, Michigan, bringing articles for American cities into line with articles for cities such as Paris and Toronto.--DaveOinSF 16:58, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

However the proposal would allow U.S. cities to be inconsistent with the vast majority of other U.S. cities and towns, which (with a few exceptions) all use the "city, state" convention. -Will Beback 23:42, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Mitch Albom

doesnt Mitch Albom live in detroit? - NJ Rock

I don't know if he lives in Detroit, but he does live somewhere in the Metro area.69.222.55.140 06:32, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

To my knowledge, he lives in Franklin, MI a NW suburb of Detroit.

Edits by Something14 and 69.237.93.187

Is there a consensus for this deletion? It seems to be well sourced. The assertion in an edit summary that "Toyota is better" doesn't seem to justify this section's deletion. -- Selket ^Talk 00:17, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

• I agree with you and have reverted for now. The way to challenge a well-sourced passage is to either call the sources into question and/or bring up better sources. Just saying "nuh uh!" and removing it isn't a good way to go about it. --W.marsh 01:11, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

We need statistics!

I think the general consensus on detroit's economic situation is "downtown is getting better, other neighborhoods aren't". But mostly I've only seen anectodal backing; I can't find any statistics on number of jobs/business downtown over the years, etc. Can anyone track some down? Tlogmer ( talk / contributions ) 06:11, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Population

Population should remain consistent with other pages and not be updated until the entire MSA or CSA is updated for all cities.Thomas Paine1776 23:41, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Who is this? Reveal yourself. Also, what is the reason behind that? The 2006 population information was made available March 22, 2007. What's the precedent behind this? --Criticalthinker 02:53, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

There is no need to tinker with the population every 6 months of estimates unless you are going to constantly change every wikipedia population Thomas Paine1776 23:41, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Metro populations are updated yearly, and most other city pages list the most recent estimate as an additional fact. If there is no precendent, you don't have much to stand on to deny the change. If we're going to change city populations for each yearly estimate, there is absolutely no reason why we can't (or shouldn't) do the same for the Metro populations to keep them in agreement. --Criticalthinker 05:14, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

What's with the anti-Detroit distortions

Err, FACTS?68.211.77.10 12:14, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Detroit has prosperous neighborhoods, and much success to tout, especially in tourist areas, such as Midtown, which draws millions of tourists every year. (eg. see Model D Media). What's with the anti-Detroit? There have been expectations for metro Detroit's population to shift around, yet the city of Detroit's population density is twice that of Atlanta.

Just because a sinking ship hasn't gone totally under yet doesn't mean it is not sinking. You are only fooling yourselves if you think that. In 1950 the city of Detroit had over 1,849,000 residents. Today there is less than half that number, and falling.68.211.77.10 12:14, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Atlanta has a greater percentage of its population in the suburbs than Detroit. Detroit still has about twice the population density of Dallas, Houston, and Phoenix. Detroit has a higher population density than Miami. 

Not city-limit wise. Miami has over 386,000 residents in just 35.6 sq. miles. Detroit has 886,000 residents in 138 sq. miles. Miami is over 10,000 per sq. mile. Detoit is in the 6,000's.68.211.77.10 12:14, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Detroit neigbhorhoods have an extensive network of parks, libraries, YMCAs, etc.  The city just added a $32 million YMCA downtown, one of the nicest in the nation.  Also, Detroit neighborhoods have faired well in comparitive studies with other major urban cities. The city regularly hosts large crowds downtown, especially since the new stadiums, many are looking for even more to see and do, ie, the influx of tourism is overwhelming downtowns restaurants and parking. This is a super success. 

Hosting out-of-state conventions is not the measure of success Detroit should go by. Success begins with ground-level improvement, not hype. That means cleaning up abandoned lots, building new housing units, increasing jobs, etc.68.211.77.10 12:14, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

The riverfront is typically packed with suburbanites for events. The city faces about the same issues as nearly every major urban area in the US and these items are discussed in the body of the article. Detroit bashing is not appropriate for the introduction, or the intro to any city. Other cities do not stereotype in their introductions. A low income neighborhood with older homes, should not be branded as "blight," it is low income. Clearance 100 year old buildings and collapsing structure is not "urban praire," rather it is common public policy in major cities to remove such buildings.

Get a grip! You lack total understanding or comprehension of the issues. The problem with 'urban prairie' ISN'T that the old buildings are torn down. The problem is that no one wants to live there, developers don't want the land, etc. An unmown field of grass where a house once stood is NOT a positive development, despite your spin.68.211.77.10 12:26, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

You might be surprised to learn that there are higher numbers of poor and jobless in New York than in Detroit. 

New York has a much larger population.68.211.77.10 12:26, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Do you suppose downtown Detroit has less crime than downtown New York? The most recent riots have been in Cincinnati 2001, Paris 2005, Seattle 1999, Los Angelos 1992, New York has had looting, New Orleans has had looting, etc, yet these cities do not mention it in their introductions. Thomas Paine1776 23:09, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Problems elsewhere don't justify your rose-colored glasses. Detroit is struggling because of two main issues: race and unionism. Race divides, and the city is 81% black while the suburbs are mostly white. Look at NYC, a polyglot racial mixture with all kinds of people living in the city...not an 'open prison' of left-behind poor families. As for unions, history shows that big business (investors) are often a key to success, and that investment doesn't happen in states/areas with high taxes and unionized labor forces. Those in the pro-union camp simply don't understand economics. You can beat up a scab all you like, how hard is it to find another willing third-world worker? Like Communism, the system simply doesn't work. Worker salary should be set by the supply and demand of the free market.68.211.77.10 12:26, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

According to the US Census, for 2006, the Great Lakes States of the Midwest region and the West Central North region have the highest employment to population ratio (more people working as a percent of the population) of any region in the county, higher than the US averge, higher than those in the Sunbelt, the West, the South, the Pacific, or the Northeast. Michigan has about the same employment to population ratio as California, Florida, New York, New Mexico, and Arizona. Don't expect to hear big media replay that over and over again. Thomas Paine1776 01:35, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Because the unemployed quickly move to other states/cities! You are only looking at small parts of the picture. The total picture is best told by the metro's GDP and by population data. Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, and Phoenix were the four fastest-growing metro areas, 2000-2006. Detroit? One of only 2 in the top 30 to post 'negative growth.' Enough said.68.211.77.10 12:26, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

The truth hurts! Blight is blight. There are streets on the east-side that don't have a single livable house on them. The only solution is to blight is a bulldozer. Take a drive down the 100 block of E. Dakota, by the Dakota Inn, not a single house, not one. Thank God the church didn't get burned down. Detroit has good parts and bad parts. Its good parts are nice and its bad parts are really bad. You can't judge Detroit solely by the nice restaurants, stadiums, or casinos downtown like the mayor's office would like. It is a start, but it's not a balanced picture. There are 8 miles between the city limits and downtown and they are hard to see at 75 mph on Chrysler freeway. Don't dwell on the negative but you can't paint Detroit as a utopia either. Just because something is written that isn't so nice doesn't mean it is an anti-Detroit bash.—MJCdetroit 01:46, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

There are sections in need of redevelopment in every major city. And there does appear to be an excess of Detroit bashing and vandalism here. Thomas Paine1776 01:55, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

One sentence in the intro?? The article is fine...It's late, tuck the boys in and tell Carlita I said hi. —MJCdetroit 02:32, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

The important statistic is employed percent of working-age population, not total popuation. If the situation here is so great, why's it so hard to find a job? Compare the Detroit and San Fran craigslist job boards (I try to avoid doing that too much 'cause it makes me want to move). Tlogmer ( talk / contributions ) 06:56, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I think the solution to this argument is numbers -- we need to find some solid statistcs on population, unemployment, economic growth, etc. I'm trained as a tech writer and do plenty of graphic design, so I'd be will to make graphs out of whatever data people dig up. It would actually be pretty interesting to see detroit's population loss graphed against new york's (or graphed against sales at motown records; that's one i've been wanting to do for awhile but I don't know where to find the data). Also, Standing in the Shadows of Motown and High Tech Soul are both great movies about how detroit's unique condition (some parts horrible, some parts great) helped create motown and techno. For example, Detroit's one of the only places in the world with boarded up skyscrapers, but its glut of warehouse space helped spark the techno movement. The article needs to reflect the city as it really is, good and bad. Tlogmer ( talk / contributions ) 06:52, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Response to: If the situation is so great in Michigan, why is it so hard to find a job?: Michiganians have it better than they think. Reasons for the difficulty in job seeking appear to be there are more who seek, there are many new graduates Universities there who want the job, Michigan is a strong supporter of education. There are simply more highly qualified or highly skilled workers in Michigan than some other states, so more compete for the good jobs. Michigan has an overage of teachers, for example, it produces more than it needs, and it pays teachers more than other states, more have master's degrees. So a master degreed teacher may be the preferred applicant at the bookstore over the retail worker. There are more mechanics in Michigan, more technicans, more chemists, lawyers, engineers, and so on. Law schools are big business in Michigan, a law grad who isn't practicing may be the preferred applicant over the business grad. Michigan companies also are willing to keep dedicated workers a long time who didn't finish or didn't attend college, so turnover is probably much lower and loyality of is probably higher. In states that have categories of so called employment shortages, there is a reason for the shortage, eg. a lack of qualified applicants or the pay is too low to generate interest. Southern states have shortages, but the reason is there aren't enough qualified applicants. The percent employed is lower and the unemployment rate is lower statisically when they don't seek. In Michigan there are an abundance of qualified applicants, a case made by the Governor when she courts new business for Michigan. In theory, Michigan's highly skilled workforce should be attracting new business, and it does, but it could be faster if the state gets more development capital. It isn't that the Michigan economy is isn't good, its that there are many more qualifed people in Michigan seeking good pay. The pay in other many other states isn't very good. If everyone on the block were to panic and attempted to sell their house, the average price of houses would fall too creating a housing glut. Another possible cause of a metro Detroit job seekers' difficulty or perceived difficulty to find work is they are specialized and are unwilling to try different jobs offered in the metro Detroit area. A financial service worker can just as easily be successful in customer service for a bolt maker, a trucking company, or an airline. The economy in metro Detroit is very robust. The unemployment rate refers to those seeking work, not the percent of those who are already employed. Michigan is fine with the percent employed. Michigan also forms new business at a competitive rate. The solution is for Michigan to market itself and its products even more agressively, lure new companies with its workforce, and continue its quality of life/tourism development. The rise in tourism downtown, upscale development, and the increase in urban professionals is succeeding for the city. Thomas Paine1776 01:25, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Detroit has been trying smoke-and-mirrors spin for 30 years (the Renaissance Center, 1977). The fact of the matter is, you don't fix problems with band-aids, you fix them with fundamentals. The city of Atlanta solved much of its problems by tearing down its public housing projects and replacing them with mixed-income private residences. Atlanta has dealt with the race issue by being more inclusive. Whites have returned to the city (African-American % of the population dropped from 69% in 1980 to 54% today) while many African-Americans have moved to the suburbs (DeKalb and Clayton Counties are majority-black). The city's tax problem has been solved...with economic development. What Detroit needs are major efforts to:

A. Tear down all...ALL...abandoned/blighted housing units (to reduce drug havens/crack houses). B. Lower taxes and provide economic incentives for developers to rebuild housing within the city. Increases in residential units are often followed by commercial investment. C. Change the weather. With global warming, it shouldn't be long before Detroit becomes Detroit beach. Just kidding.

The bottom line is that the fundamentals of racial and economic division (as noted by the movie 8-Mile and the line between Detroit and Grosse Point) must be changed. Atlanta has been the 'city too busy to hate.' The African-American mayor has partnered with the mostly-white business community. Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick is beginning to understand this. But huge touristy projects aren't enough. Making the city a place where people would want to move to/live is the key. Once that happens, the laissez-faire hand of capitalism tends to self-repair things.68.211.77.10 12:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Historic skyscrapers' are a treasure for residential development. As the city's tourism grows, the historic district will be the new boom area. Thomas Paine1776 19:43, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

What should go in the intro?

The intro of the article (before the table of contents) is the most important part; a lot of people won't read past the first few paragraphs, so it should give a clear comprehensive summary. But it seems like there's disagreement about what it should include. Instead of hashing it out directly on the article page and undoing each other's edits, I think we should try to agree on a list of things, so I've started a page at #The Intro should include... Tlogmer ( talk / contributions ) 06:24, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

A city deserves a proper intoduction, not a list of complaints, or an anti overdwelling slant against the particular place dubbed as a summary, not a list of agenda oriented conclusory statements about opinions and feelings against the American auto industry and re-analyasis of items already discussed in the body of the article. Does Dallas have an intro paragraph devoted to anti-oil industry issues? Does New York City inro have a an intro paragraph devoted to financial service contraversies? Do any of the recent rioting cities like Cincinnati have even a mention of it in their intro "summary." No they don't. Detroit's auto companies are highly successful companies which invest more in themselves than most companies in the US and have many of the world's most talented, highly skilled, and higly educated people working for them, they not only make cars and finance them, but competing against governments on three continents which pay for the benefits for their citizens that are paid for by Detroit automakers in the US, Detroit automkers are showing decade over decade volume gains, irrespective of market share, they are selling millions more vehicles than they sold in prior decades. Therefore, much big media analyis does not comport with the truth. Detroit auto makers are investing in new plants and in new technologies. Therefore, conclusory opinions dubbed a 'summary' which protray to the reader a pessimistic outlook are highly questionable. One could conclude that Detroit today has a more prospersous outlook than in any decade since the 1950s and 1960s. Similarly, pessimistic conclusions about employment and unemployment for the region by big media are highly questionable. Detroit's inner city employment to population ratio is comparable to that of inner city New York for example. They don't make cars in New York City, or do they? And thats right down the street from big media. The manufacturing states of the Midwest have one of the highest employment to population ratios in the United States (the number of people working as a percent of the population), it is higher than the Sun Belt states, the South, or the West. Therefore, attempting to portray to the reader a pessimistic outlook of the region is very misleading. Whether big media does it, does not make it correct. Detroit's automakers challenges are related primarly to pension and benefit issues and not other reasons typically parroted by big media, but pensions and benefits of working Americans are not necessarily important issues for big media. Any particular city does not deserve inuendos. It appears that Detroit's population has somewhat stabilized and several other cities have seen roughly equivalent decreases in the past two decades. Conclusory discussions of population trends are not appropriate for the introduction, as they are dubious, many of those choosing to move into the city and its redeveloped housing now are more affluent showing the city is attractive to new arrivals who see it as a good investment, this is a positive trend, not a negative one for city planners. The city is obviously succeeding street by street from the Northwest to Downtown to Midtown and gradually to other areas. Anyone making a visit to Detroit for an event recently has seen large impressive crowds of suburbanites willing to spend lots of money on Detroit's redeveloped areas. There is very high level of enthusiasm and excitement present in Detroit's tourist areas that wasn't there in past decades which is equivalant to some of the most visited cities. Therefore, the types of statements that convey in the readers mind a trend toward decline are highly inaccurate. Detroit's automakers are similarly making great products implementing bold new plans. The fact that Detroit has a balanced budget and a more streamlined government shows that the city itself has decisive leadership worthy or praise, which a change from the criticism of city's leadership in the the 1970s and 1980s. The city has invested very smartly in itself and appears to have created very postive trend, not merely "some success" but very succussful in an impressive way. It has added many new streetlights, streetscape, facilitated redevlopment of lofts and condominiums. There have been many feature stories on the leadership of Dennis Archer and now Kwame Kilpatrick. Sure there is much more to do, but what has been done is very impressive. Compared to other cities. Detroit has a magnificent historic district that is obviously growing from the inside out. The State has invested heavily in remaking Detroit's freeway system. The next major development challenges include revitalizing Michigan Central Station, Michigan Avenue, and the Vernor Juction area, to name a few. Detroit's neighborhoods have many older structures that are worth saving. Poor neighborhoods should not be stereotyped as bad neigbhorhoods. Schools such as Cass Technical school illustrate Detroit's committment. The present article on Detroit is being modest, it doesn't nearly describe its postives. Moreover, many of those moving into Detroit are affluent. In essence Detroit automakers outcompete the foreign competitition and still pay for their own way. There is not place for globalists perjoritives or elitist feelings about poor people and working class americans in the Detroit intro. Read some of the other city introductions. Detroit should be treated at least as well as these. Detroit bashing, haggling about issues, adding conclusory digs, one liners, is not really appropriate for the introduction to this or any city. Thomas Paine1776 00:32, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I believe the current intro is good. Though every city has bad neighborhoods and more affluent ones; Detroit, in particular has 26% of the population living below the poverty line. I think a balanced representation is what we currently have: a note on the success of Detroit as a city to reinvent itself through tourism juxtaposed with the overall ineffect of boosts in tourism to improve the living conditions of the impoverished residents. The same is true of Baltimore.--Loodog 01:29, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Baltimore's introduction is much shorter than Detroit's and makes no mention of the city's woes or successes. The next largest city after Detroit, Indianapolis, similarly has a shorter introduction and makes only a minor note about the city's "escape" from the Rust Belt. Even the US's three largest cities, New York City, Chicago, and Los Angeles, all have shorter introductions than Detroit's, and none of them mention those cities' population losses/gains, reputations of crime (the Chicago mobs, the LA riots, etc. NYC mentions its lowest crime rate statistics, but not the troubles NYC faced before its substantial crime drop), or (on the other hand) those cities' revitalization efforts.

The introduction is simply too long right now. Wangry 03:38, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

The intro is good, it describes the city, its about the same length as Cleveland also a featured city, The topics are covered under history and the respective sections. Thomas Paine1776 00:26, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

One sentence:

However, some neighborhoods outside the central business district are blighted with the city's focus on development issues.

does not constitute Detroit bashing, nor does it warrant an 892 word essay. Yes, Bill Gates counted them for me; 891 if you take out the extra "the" in front of 1970s. By the way, I sure am glad you got rid of that Lincoln Navigator and that big diamond earring. They were giving you such image problems—just like Steve Wilson always following you around. —MJCdetroit 00:56, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

That sentence is fine, the city's focus is on development. Paris must have 1000 year old blight though if Detroit has 100 year old blight. The major issues are the west river development, and casino impact, which could be very big. Building owners are just waiting for the development and more numbers to come in. Quicken Loans leases are up in 2010. So if they were to announce a downtown headquarters in 2008, or before, that would really get the developers moving. Thomas Paine1776 01:56, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I think that you are trying to push some type of agenda/POV here for how great Detroit is or could be and the mention of anything bad shouldn't be in the article—it's Detroit bashing as you put it. I think the article needs to balence the good with the bad and not what ifs. This is an encyclopedia article and not tourism pamphlet. For whatever reason, Mr. Paine, you are biased in your writtings and if your biased on this subject then you shouldn't contribute to this article. I'm not trying to mean or a smart-ass (hense no Kwane refs this time) but seriously— take a step back from this article for a while. Am I the only one that sees this? Respectfully, —MJCdetroit 02:48, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Article concern (with regards to FA)

I recently started looking at the article after a long hiatus, and have noticed that the article is not only becoming too long (details are added to sections where there are already corresponding sub-articles, notably in the culture section), but also there is suddenly a very pro-Detroit POV to it (any problems that the city experiences - such as an economy that is still heavily based on the Big Three auto companies, urban blight, and conflicts with the suburbs - are glossed over or eliminated entirely). When I read the article in its present form, I get the feeling that Detroit is prospering as much if not more than New York City, San Francisco, or Washington DC (though the business sections of the Free Press and Detroit News, as well as several national publications, tell me otherwise). In essence, the article is no longer balanced between the fact that Detroit is experiencing a lot of redevelopment, but at the same time is still tackling a lot of urban and economic related issues.

These factors are enough to place this article's featured status in danger (something I wish to avoid, given that I had worked to get the article to FA in the first place). Hence, I have proposed that action be taken to address the concerns I have with the article (they are in the to-do list). I will hold off for about a month (maybe more) before I decide to put this article up for FAR. If the problems continue to persist, I have no choice but to put this article up for FAR, which could possibly lead to FA removal if no further action is taken. Pentawing^Talk 23:38, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

• I hope it doesn't come to FA Review... granted I didn't help with the FAC but I've watched this article for a while and was glad to see it become a FA, that's hard to do for major cities nowadays. The crime section, for example, is now disorganized and quite weak compared to the FA version of that section [16]. It's a complicated issue, if you read this talk page there are concerns that the article dwelled too much on Detroit's problems... but I think the article has gone to the other extreme in many places, glossing over them, or providing a counter-argument every time something perceived as negative is said. I don't know what the solution is exactly, and I'm not saying the FA version was perfect, I just think some balanced middle ground should be sought. But the people who've made the changes should be aware that one consequence of whitewashing the article could be the removal of featured status. --W.marsh 00:08, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Agreeing with Pentawing. If we use other cities as precedent, the majority of information about a city can be presented with minimal spin, even things about the desirability of living in the city. For example, Baltimore has an intro on its population, geographic importance, and historical founding. There is a section on crime (which deserves note) though later in the article.--Loodog 01:33, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

• To the contrary, the Detroit article is even better. Unlike many other cities, the Detroit article even discusses the relevant issues and problems! The Detroit article is the most balanced and up to date too. The business section of the Detroit Free Press headlines for Detroit, recently, March 21, 2007, Projects revitalize Midtown, and March 16, 2007, Harmonie Park plans receive a boost . And for just one example, the crime section on Detroit had a lack of citations and it had overt mistakes of fact, for example, regarding the investigation into the city's police department the dates were incorrect and the article failed to note that the City of Detroit was the party that requested the investigation into its police department. The crime article is actually better. The crime article failed to note the study which showed crime in downtown Detroit is actually lower than the state and national average and to document it. New York City has plenty of problems, and they are not mentioned in the intro, eg., the economic decline of New York City has been discussed since 1977, "New York City's economy has been declining since 1969". According to a 2005 report, African Americans are better off in Michigan than in New York, Michigan doesn't even make the list Or maybe you haven't read, New York City: Garbage Capital of the World" The most recent riots have been in Cincinnati 2001, Paris 2005, Seattle 1999, Los Angelos 1992, New York has had looting, New Orleans has had looting, etc, yet these cities do not mention it in their introductions. Thomas Paine1776 19:29, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

• Point to a better featured US city article than Detroit for discussion. There isn't one, Detroit is the best and the most balanced. Other featured cities read like complete ads from top to bottom, Boston, Seattle, and Houston contains little or no negative information. Boston has the recent contraversial takeover of Fleet First Boston by Bank of America buried in the history section with no negatives in the economy section, Boston doesn't mention its high taxes. Boston article fails to mention one word about the Big Dig. Houston is a featured article, Enron doesn't appear in the economy section, its buried in the history section. There is not a single negative word in Houston's intro or in the economy section. Houston does mention energy industry, but fails to mention the economic devastation and job losses from imported oil, Paul Harvey said it was 300,000 oil workers who suffered job losses. Those who live in the South may have met displaced workers from Texas. No disscussion of problems from illegal immigration. And that is a featured article? No discussions of illegal immigration or even a mention in the featured San Francisco article and no mention of job losses in Silicon Valley either. And this is a featured article. Some of the featured cities sound like the writers are describing perfect places, unbelievable promo, with almost no negative information about the city, and some of you are fussing about Detroit? Detroit article should not be bulletin board for negative information, or those who have a complaint about the domestic auto industry. Detroit problems are very well discussed, and significantly more so than other cities. Detroit should have a triple star compared to the some of these other featured US city articles! The current Detroit article is by far the most interesting and thought provoking city article written for the entire U.S. The entire metro Detroit region is a prosperous region and the name Detroit is often synomous with the entire region for many readers, not merely problem sections of Detroit. Detroit has many prosperous neighborhoods which received no or almost no mention before. Many readers are not as concerned with city boundaries, but rather the region itself. Yet the Detroit article does an excellent job of maintaining the balance. There are many thoughtful additions, and the article is not too long, rather it's a reasonable length. Increasing, city boundaries proper are become a blurred distinction anyway in America. Many who work in the city commute. There a sizeable number of commuters from Toledo and Ontario. New York City is really five cities). For those unaware, Detroit's downtown is seeing millions of tourists and has become very vibrant entertainment hub for the region with new stadiums and developments. That is big news. And the trend is on the upswing. Detroit has improved drastically from the late 1980s. Coleman Young is not the Mayor of Detroit anymore, that era is long past for Detroit. Dennis Archer clearly changed the direction of Detroit and Kwame Kilpatrick is continuing the vision. The city has balanced its budget, thats amazing. The city council is even making good decisions. Read the city living websites and see 100 year old historic homes have been restored and are selling, thats amazing. Who would have imagined that 15 years ago? Developers are optimistic about Detroit, Ferchill is investing $176 million in the Westin Book-Cadillac Hotel. They actually tore down the silos on the Detroit Riverfront, who would have thought they'd get that done. The major expansion of the Detroit airport was based on optimistic projections for investment in the entire region that includes the city. Thomas Paine1776 14:45, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Houston has an explicit mention of Enron in its first section, "...Houston-based energy company Enron collapsed into the second-largest ever U.S. bankruptcy during an investigation surrounding fabricated partnerships that were allegedly used to hide debt and inflate profits."

Boston mentions race-riots in the 70s, high cost of living, gentrification issues today, and the very merger you speak of, "..Boston has experienced a loss of regional institutions, which included the acquisition of the Boston Globe by The New York Times, and the loss to mergers and acquisitions of local financial institutions such FleetBoston Financial, which was acquired by Charlotte-based Bank of America in 2004."

Every city has "positives" and "negatives". The point of a concise wikipedia article is the take the most salient of these points and densely pack them in with minimal discussion, as wikipedia city articles are not supposed to be political science/sociology/history books, but rather summaries. This is why I streamlined the intro to the cause of the city's woes (loss of manufacturing industry post-war, the trouble with the Rust Belt) and the fact that there's been rejuvenation in the tourism and commercial sectors. I think this is more appropriate than a comprehensive list of symptoms of economic recovery. But this will go below. Please vote.--Loodog 19:23, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Forgot to mention that Houston supplanted Los Angeles as the #1 most polluted city in the country. Wonder if the Houston article says anything about that? Ypsidan 19:07, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

With regards to FAR, I haven't thoroughly examined the content, but there are some structural items that could be addressed. External links may need pruning per WP:EL, WP:NOT; I fixed the footnotes per WP:FN; and the footnote formatting needs a lot of attention. There is no consistent bibliographic style, and a good deal of information is missing about the cites; see WP:CITE/ES for examples of reference formatting. At minimum, publisher should be included for all sources, and last access date on all websources, as well as author and publication date where available. There are WP:DASH problems and WP:MOSNUM problems throughout; hyphens, en-dashes and em-dashes aren't used correctly, and there should be non-breaking hardspaces between numbers and units of measurement (fixing these sorts of things is time consuming). These sorts of MOS issues are routinely corrected in current FACs. I would strongly suggest trying to maintain FA standards without going through FAR, since getting a city article by FAC/FAR is much harder then when this article was promoted. For example, the History section here is undercited, and wouldn't likely pass FAC today. Here's another random example of text that should be cited: Since the 1990s, there have been plans to redevelop the riverfront area from the Ambassador Bridge to Belle Isle (the largest island park in a U.S. city) There is also a lot of opinion in Entertainment that could be cited. All in all, I hope editors will bring this to FA standard without the need for FAR; there are issues to work on in addition to the content dispute. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:04, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing the footnotes. The Detroit article has plenty of citations, though the history and entertainment as your say could use more, though it made the FA status when it was less well documented that it is currently. Count how many there are compared to other featured articles. The issue of consistency in citations straddles all featured articles. Thomas Paine1776 23:00, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Sandy George - We'll try to get as many citations as possible, much of the original article didn't cite common facts. The acreage on Belle Isle, 982 acres, makes it larger than Central Park - How meticulous do self evident facts need to be? Examples like the Ambassador Bridge in the news, final approval for the twin span, which at this point is a formality, is expected this summer. Thomas Paine1776 22:04, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

It isn't self-evident to me that Belle Isle is the largest island park in a U.S. city. I don't have a counterexample at hand, but a brief look around found that Key Biscayne, connected to Miami by a causeway (although admittedly not part of the city proper), has 1200 acres of parkland, for example, and the Bay Area's Angel Island is not that much smaller at 800 acres. -- Avenue 03:06, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Key Biscayne island has residents and a town called Key Biscayne, it appears to take up about 1/3 of the Island, if the island were all park you would be right geographically, even though it is not in Miami and the parks are county and national. We all know Belle Isle isn't the largest island, but it is the largest city park. Thomas Paine1776 20:35, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh yes, Houston has Enron buried so deep in the history section, you have to hunt for the negative information. Its not in Houston's economy section and Enron was a recent event. And so you are saying its ok for Boston to omit the takeover of Fleet First by Bank of America from its introduction or economy section as a symptom of Boston's diminished status as a financial center. Many of the other featured U.S. cities contain little or no negative information in their introductions or economy section. And many of the featured U.S. cities contain very little negative information at all. That is the point. And the point was made that the Midwest has a higher employment to population ratio than the Northeast, the Sunbelt, or the West. The Midwest is not falling off the map. Thomas Paine1776 23:00, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

The Detroit article appears to be the most well written of any U.S. city, name a better one so we can discuss it. Thomas Paine1776 23:00, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

revert, revert, revert, vote now and we decide

I didn't want it to have to come to this, but we're going to have to vote on each line in that lengthy 3rd paragraph, line-by-line, since we can't come to consensus. Place your vote:

"Though the City of Detroit is struggling with economic issues, the most recent of several efforts to revitalize the historic downtown has seen success. "

Keep it

I vote keep this line. It summarizes everything nicely.--Loodog 19:34, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Junk it

"A 2006 press release from Mayor Kwami Kilpatrick reported that the city has balanced its budget and is seeing new growth in business and tourism."

Keep it

Junk it

I vote junk it. It is specific information that takes up a lot of space in an intro and is largely redundant.--Loodog 19:34, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

"Recent revival activity in Detroit's downtown includes a renovated Renaissance Center, a revitalization of the riverfront, the construction of the Compuware headquarters, and of three casino hotels. "

Keep it

Junk it

I vote junk it. More specific details that take up too much space in an intro.--Loodog 19:34, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

"However, some neighborhoods outside the central business district are blighted with the city's focus on development issues."

Keep it

I vote keep it. Emphasizes that Detroit's recent economic activity has been commercial, tourist-related, and concentrated on one region.--Loodog 19:34, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Junk it

"The city proper population, though still declining, has begun to stabilize from the free fall seen in the 1980s which followed court-ordered desegregation of its schools."

Keep it

I vote keep it, but removing the note about the desegregation, as Detroit's population was already dropping at 10% twenty years before this.--Loodog 19:34, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, chop off the last part (well, it's been done) -- there's no need to editorialize about what might have caused the decline; there are any number of reasons. And anyway, according to the chart on the page, the steepest decline was in the '70s, not the '80s. Tlogmer ( talk / contributions ) 13:08, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Junk it

Junk it.

Detroit is still losing about 10,000 residents annually. That may be a somewhat smaller number than before, but it's not what I would consider a sign of a stable population. Funnyhat 05:16, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Further discussion

Your pared down version:

Though the City of Detroit is struggling with economic issues, the most recent of several efforts to revitalize the historic downtown has seen success. However, some neighborhoods outside the central business district are blighted with the city's focus on development issues. The city proper population, though still declining, has begun to stabilize from the free fall seen in the 1980s.

Its ok, but it doesn't say what the efforts to revitalize are. If there were a limitation on the number of words, your version would be ok. But why not say something more positive? Cleveland's intro does. Thomas Paine1776 00:41, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

The introduction serves as a summary, examples are meant to be left out.--Loodog 00:47, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I can agree to your version, it's concise, and not overly negative. Thomas Paine1776 00:52, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Loopdog - Wangry has made some nice adjustments to the introduction to make it more concise, hopefully this will resolve the criticisms and the introduction being too long. We're trying to preserve as much of the original articles settled language flavor in the intro, and keep it accurate and balanced. The article should be fair to Detroit. At the same time we're fending off several cases of vandalism. Thanks, Thomas Paine1776 21:53, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

The sentences taken together achieve a balance, taking away might be unbalanced. (The population taken in 1980 reflected what happened in the 1970s is what the person meant by the sentence, that's accurate). No problem with removing desegretation. An increased number of people left after desegretation. Outflux to suburbia was a natural phenomenon in the 1950s and 1960s with increased use of interstate highways anyway. The third paragraph appears to be balanced and concise. Cleveland, a featured city mentions specifics about redevelopment in its introduction. It sums up blight and development. If it says something about blight, it should say something about development, thats being balanced and fair. Suggest something better, and we'll listen. Cleveland which is a featured article has an introduction about the same length as Detroit. People wanted the various nick names in the last paragraph of the introduction too, so we accomodated. Thomas Paine1776 22:28, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

We're voting on whether the sentences taken together achieve a balance.--Loodog 00:06, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Comparable paragraphs from introductions of featured cities.

Cleveland:

City residents and tourists benefit from investments made by wealthy residents in the city's heyday in arts and cultural institutions, and philanthropy also helped to establish a robust public library system in the city. More recent investments have provided the city with tourist attractions in the downtown area, such as Jacobs Field, the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, and Playhouse Square Center. In studies conducted by The Economist in 2005, Cleveland and Pittsburgh were ranked as the most livable cities in the United States, and the city was ranked as the best city for business meetings in the continental U.S. Nevertheless, the city faces continuing challenges, in particular from concentrated poverty in some neighborhoods and difficulties in the funding and delivering of high-quality public education.

Detroit:

Though the city is struggling with economic issues, recent efforts to revitalize the historic downtown have seen success. The city has balanced its budget and is seeing new growth in business and tourism. Recent revival activity downtown includes a renovated Renaissance Center, a revitalized riverfront, Compuware headquarters, and of three casino hotels. However, some neighborhoods outside the central business district are blighted with the city's focus on development issues. The city proper population has begun to stabilize from the free fall which followed court-ordered desegregation of its schools in the 1970s.

The Detroit paragraph seems the least generous and a bit more critical. Thomas Paine1776 00:41, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, we'll wait for persepectives to change in time to come. Ruennsheng 11:43, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

"known as the world's traditional automotive center..."

I understand the general implication here, but the statement is so generic it's open to challenge. What does it really mean? A more specified sentence would better get the point across: "The Detroit area saw the first mass production of automobiles in the world [I assume], and it continues to be a leading automotive center." Marskell 09:09, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Many cities employ the term world where appropriate. In the case of Detroit, it is well recognized. There is no need to detract from the Detroit's well known reputation as the world's automotive center. Its not disputed in the automotive industry. Detroit is known as the "automobile capital of the world." Its very common, Britannica fully recognizes it as noted. The language of world's traditional automotive center has been with the this article since it has been a featured article. It was one of the highlights. It is a fair/accurate statement which interprets this historic moniker. If someone wants to change it to read, "automobile capital of the world," thats fine. Traditional appropriately captures the historical context, and it appears to be an effort to capture the fairness by the original author of it. Moreover, the U.S is the world's largest car market, every maker wants access to it. They all focus on Detroit. Virtually every major automotive company has ties to the Detroit area and attends meetings there. Foreign auto companies have congregated design and tech centers in the Detroit area. The most sophisticated auto technology companies choose to congregate in Detroit area for the reason of convenience. Let's be fair to Detroit, at least as fair as other cities. Thomas Paine1776 23:33, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I did not say you can't be "fair to Detroit." I'm saying it's a generic sentence that can be challenged. "The U.S is the world's largest car market"? Fine, but the sentence doesn't mention the U.S. In my experience in "the world," "the world" drives Toyota, a trend that shows no sign of slowing down. Ontario has surpassed Michigan in total automotive production in NA. As below, speaking for the world is never a good idea because a) you can't competently do so b) it's stylistically limp. Below, for instance: "With one of the world's most recognizable skylines..." According to whom? The citizens of the world? Marskell 07:31, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Friend, almost any sentence in any article can be challenged. The Detroit article is very well written and is among the most balanced of all the city articles. Toyota has one of its most important tech centers in the Detroit area, Nissan has a most important design center in the Detroit area, Volkswagen of America is headquartered in Detroit. There are major subsidiaries of Toyota in Detroit, eg. Denso. The U.S. is the worlds' largest car market and Detroit is the center of it. Most of the world's automotive research & development takes place in the Detroit area. Most of the world's profit in auto industry is made in the U.S market. The encyclopedia Brittanica acknowledgment that Detroit is the automobile capital of the world is fair/accurate. This is not disputed in the auto industry. Plants aren't the total picture, the Lansing Cadillac plant is one of the world's most advanced, the Ford 500/Taurus is made in Chicago. Toledo has plants, and so on. This plant or that plant is the main or only point. Plants move around from time to time. GM and Ford have plans for more plants and modernizations in Michigan. Michigan ranked in the top for new facilities for five years running. The U.S auto market is going to expand along with the rest of the world. (As noted there are decade over decade volume gains for GM, Ford, and Chrysler, irrespective of market share). Highly advanced processes for manufacturing are developed in the Detroit area in large engineering firms. The Next Energy Center in Detroit is the leading facility for hydrogen fuel cell development. It has been key in the development of US energy policy. See Gov John Englers testimony in Congress. Michigan typically ranks second in R&D in the US with the US itself accounting for 40 percent of the world's R&D according the National Science Foundation. Detroit is a main world location for lasers used in high tech manufacturing all over the world. There are secret operations in the city. Onstar is headquartered in Detroit and Onstar is used by foreign automakers. OnStar operations center has the ability to manage the flow of all of the traffic in the Unites States. GM studies in smart road technology may change the way you drive. GM itself headquartered in Detroit. The DCX technology center in Auburn Hills is the largest global facility in in the entire Daimler Chrysler corporation, its larger than anything they have in Europe. There are new facilities for auto making in Detroit city proper, such as America Axle, the Chrysler plant. Detroit is the headquarters for the United States military TACOM, thats all ground vehicles for the World's most advanced military. There are typically more GM vehicles sold in Canada than Honda sells in the U.S. The contention that the world drives Toyota is not really accurate per se, though there's no need to get into all that. Ford generally outsells Toyota in global markets where the two compete head to head. Toyota counts its half subsidiary owned Daihatsu sales, a virtually unknown brand in the US, which doesn't sell in the US or compete with Ford. Ford doesn't count Mazda sales, but many American Mazda buyers believe they are buying a Ford, since Ford is promoting the Mazda label to its base. Yet, Mazda sales are not counted in Ford's total. The democgraphics of the Toyota gain in the US can be challenged by pointing out that its the same customer base with a not so high birth rate upper income often owning multiple models. Japan's makers don't have the strong of a market share in Europe, about 12 percent. Japan's auto makers receive just as much global criticism and have their own share of problems which may get barely gets mentioned by the US media. GM is the dominating brand in China, and that market is growing. New York City is often called the financial capital of the world, yet most of the world's electronic transactions are processed in Virgina, Europe, and now some in Florida. That doesn't change New York City's status. Half of the U.S. largest bank, Citi Bank's global Headquarters has been permenantly moved to Tampa, following 9/11 that hasn't changed New York City's mention as the world's financial capital. There is far more potential for layoff in the financial services sector which is more easily displaced, watch that trend, those numbers could reach 500,000 layoffs.

As far as trends are concerned, the war, record low US savings rates, and speculation of oil prices has temporatily hampered GM, Ford, and Chrysler. The trends can easily change. Financials show GM and Ford making progress on their plans. It appears that GM has mastered a successful formula to control its massive pension and benefit funds cost. Ford can do it too. A restored saving rate in the US, a relaxing of oil speculation, and Detroit will be zooming. Unemployment rates are not as relevant in Michigan, since there are a high quantity of overqualified job seekers with a high percent of the the qualifed population employed and with low turnover.

GM, Ford, Chrysler, and Toyota have chosen Canada for manufacturing because of health care costs. The U.S may ultimately adopt the Canadian plan. Canada has a balanced budget for several years now. Canada's economy is shining . . its one of the best in the world.

Detroit has direct flights to Beijing and Europe, it is also the geographic center of it for that matter. Most of the world's profit in autos is made in the American market. The World Congress of the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) has their annual convention at Cobo Hall in Detroit. The North American International Auto Show typically previews more new models than any other show in the world. We should use the term world where appropriate, it is stylistic correct. The Encycopedia Britannica uses it for Detroit as noted. If the articles are interest the readers they will read them. Other encylopedia entries for city articles attempt to keep the readers interest.

Touched up Toronto article, with a bit more touching up, Torononto should become a featured article. The superlatives on Toronto are not exaggeration, just a bit too much repitition. New York can become a featured article with a few touch ups. These articles should keep the well written prose. There is nothing wrong saying positive things. San Francisco needs more postives sentences, its very hum drum, too bland, too dry, its needs some uplift. Thinking positive is good medicine for the world. The world is filled with good news. The major media in the US is far too negative, far too hysterical, and people don't like it as polls have shown, they are not the example to follow.

Well, thats long responese already.

Detroit's skyline is one of the world's recognized, ask someone, they know it, the Renaissance Center is unmistakeable. How is that the citizens of someone's world could know a chorus of distorted negativisms about Detroit, but now know its skyline? The entire world watches the superbowl and the NAIAS on the net or at least clips of it. Surely its citizens have seen the Renaissance Center. Thomas Paine1776 01:32, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, I'm obviously not going to reply to all of this. Your many nuances only underscore my point—that generic sentences are a bad idea. You have much material above that could better make your point and be less open to challenge. On last: "Detroit's skyline is one of the world's recognized, ask someone, they know it." This is meaningless to me. Top five? Top fifty? What does it mean? And for the record, the entire world does not watch the Superbowl—something like >90% of the audience is American.

"...hasn't changed New York City's mention as the world's financial capital." Our intro on New York City doesn't say this, and it shouldn't. It too would be generic and open to challenge (cf. City of London).

However, these are small points that I picked to illustrate a larger pattern. Marskell 08:54, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Many of the city articles have become stale or overly negative. Other encyclopedias do not practice that. That illustrates a larger pattern. Detroit is the world's automotive capital to a greater measure than New York or London rank along side each other as the leading world finanicial centers. Half of Ctibank heaquarters is not in New York anymore, its in Tampa.Bank of America is not headquartered in New York. Much of the financial services sector outsources to India. The EU financial center is Germany, why isn't Frankfurt mentioned as a world financial center, the EU is larger than London? Frankfurt has been minimized, is there a reason? Isn't Frankfurt the largest stock exchange in the EU, then Paris? Sounds like a bias against Frankurt by financialists. Washington, DC is not listed as a global city even though it has the Federal Reserve headquarters? That's an obvious bias. Are New York and Paris leading world fashion centers? How can they be, the garment industry has moved to China, Mexico, Eastern Europe, India, and the Carribean. Do they even make any clothes in Paris or New York? (Detroit does have a major fashion event "Fash Bash"). There is not even a major department store company headquartered in the New York City area any more? Is there? Macy's federated headquarters is in the Midwest in Cincinnati. The other department stores have moved out of NYC to other states or were already headquartered in other states. What does this illustrate?

Detroit is the automobile capital of the world. It is not disputed in the automotive industry. Encyclopedia Britannica fully recognizes it. The U.S is the largest car market in the world where most of the global profit is made. Most of the world's automotive R&D takes place in the Detroit area. Most of the world's auto makers have ties in the Detroit area. The World Congress of the Society of Automotive Engineers convenes in Detroit at Cobo Hall. Typically more new models are introduced the NAIAS in Detroit. OnStar used by domestic and foreign automakers is based in Detroit. DaimlerChyslers largest and most advanced facility is in the Detroit suburb of Auburn Hills, MI. TACOM for the world's most powerful military is headquartered in Detroit. Detroit is the world's traditional automotive center, and that is probably an understatement. Thomas Paine1776 16:19, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

The Empire State Building, Transamerica Pyramid, the Sears Tower, the Library tower, and the Renaissance Center are all among the world's very recognizable unique stuctures. Thomas Paine1776 17:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

What Marskell said in the beginning seems like the right wording to me. We don't want to be overly geocentric. Germany invented the internal combustion engine afterall. We just invented the mass production of vehicles. Especially in 2007, where Toyota is the #2 auto maker in the world, above Ford and Chrysler, Detroit is losing its status as the only "World Automotive Capital". Ypsidan 18:56, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Detroit is the automobile capaital of the world, this is not disputed in the auto industry. Its fully reconized by Britannica. The U.S is the largest car market in the world and Detroit is the center of it. Most of the automotive R&D in the world takes place in the Detroit area. TACOM for the world's only superpower military is headquartered in Detroit. Most of the world auto industry profit is made in the US. Toyota has a major tech facility in metro Detroit, its major subsidiary Denso is also in metro Detroit. Nissan has a major design center in metro Detroit. Volkswagen of America is headquarted in metro Detroit. More automotive corporate brand names are represented in metro Detroit are than any other city. Typically more new models by the world's automakers debut at the NAIAS in Detroit. The largest and most advanced of DaimlerChrysler's corporate facilites in metro Detroit. The World Congress of SAE convenes in Detroit at Cobo Hall. Virtually every major auto company has ties to Detroit. The largest concentrations of automotive industry, and so on.

The peripheral points aren't central to it. Even so, Canada and China are majors producers becuse of Detroit's automakers investing there. GM is number one in China. GM and Ford have larger market shares than Japanese autmakers in Europe. Japanese automakers combined have about 12 percent of the market in Europe. Lexus has only three tenths of one percent of the market share in Europe despite decade long efforts. GM typically sells more vehicles in Canada than Honda sells in the US. Ford typically outsells Toyota in every market where they compete head to head, (not counting Daihatsu). Japan's makers have a small market share in Europe. China's market has passed Japan. Toyota itself is not the world's #2 carmaker, and not when it made the claims, Toyota's President admitted, only when it counts its half owned subsidiary Daihatsu, and no Daihatsus are sold in the the US. Toyotas President also admitted that if Mazda is counted with Ford, Ford is number 2. Thomas Paine1776 00:13, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Also...

I pull this out as an example; others can be found: "With one of the world's most recognizable skylines, Detroit's waterfront panorama shows a variety of architectural styles. The past meets the present as the city's historic Art Deco skyscrapers blend with the post modern neogothic spires of the Comerica Tower at Detroit Center (1994). Together with the gleaming Renaissance Center, they form the city's marque." This is writing that belongs in a tourist brochure. The prose needs to be systematically audited for things like this, but I'm afraid of being reverted. Marskell 09:21, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Art is not advertising. It's 'two' sentences in the intro of the section are intended to keep the readers attention. It is also a highly accurate description that contains a 'mininum' of well written appeal. I'll temper it a bit and take out gleaming, though I like the term. Detroit's skyline is a panorama. It's often photographed for that reason. The terms would be appropriate for other cities with panoramic skylines. Detroit has historic skyscrapers and buildings together with modern, the achitects of its more modern structures obviously took great care in their designs to blend the past with the present to complement the city's architecture. The Renaissance Center is the city's marque skyscraper, its effigy is omnipresent for the area. The intent is to keep the article interesting so the the reader will want to read it and to convey its essence for the city. The architectural critic and expert reviewers who wrote Detroit Architecture were praising of Detroit's architecture. Diplomatically speaking, when readers perceive a sort of 'organized' negativity, they won't want to read an article or consider it credible. Thomas Paine1776 23:52, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Rank at largest population size

The article says it dropped from #4 in the country. I always thought Detroit was #3 at its largest, after NYC and Chicago. This was prior to places like Los Angeles, Phoenix, Dallas, San Antonio, and Houston growing at fast rates due to migration away from places like Detroit to the Sunbelt. So from 1920 to 1940 what was #3? Philadelphia? Or was Detroit #3 afterall and this is a mistake? Let me know so I can stop telling people that Detroit was #3 if it wasn't. Thanks. Ypsidan 19:02, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, Philadelphia was #3 and Detroit was #4 from 1920 to 1940. See Rank by Population of the 100 Largest Urban Places, Listed Alphabetically by State: 1790-1990. -- Avenue 13:42, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Appropriate source?

Is it really appropriate for us to use, as a citation for the line, "Though Detroit is struggling with economic issues, recent efforts to revitalize the center city have seen success," a speech from Mayor Kilpatrick? I don't necessarily disagree with this line, but I'd like to see a citation from a more objective source. Funnyhat 05:07, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Weather records

The weather 'records' cited are really 30-year records (i.e. for the last 30 years). The all-time records may be higher or lower. In fact, I know the record high was 106 in 1936.68.211.77.10 11:49, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Midwest?

Now can we honestly call Detroit a Midwestern city? I mean with roots from northeastern states like Ohio and everything, Eastern Michigan isn't anything like the Great Plains.

Yes, it is Midwestern - just like Ohio is. Rmhermen 14:20, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Ask a resident of Buffalo, NY, Erie, PA, Cleveland, Toledo, OH, Detroit, Sault Saint Marie, Duluth, MN, Milwaukee, or Chicago what part of the U.S. they live, and they will unlikely to say northeast. Folks who live in California, Seattle or even New York City might call it the midwest, but nobody who lives on the East Coast of the United States would. Everyone in the cities I have listed would not hesitate to admit that they are Great Lakes residents, before they would admit to being in the Midwest. Wikipedia lists all of them, except Pennsylvania as part of the Great Plains. Wiki lists Midwestern United States; North Dakota, South Dakota, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Kentucky, West Virginia and Pennsylvania as border states.

Most assuredly, they would never say they are in the northeastern United States, which, according the the U.S. Census Bureau are the states of; Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Hampshire, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Vermont. The reader will note that Pennsylvania is listed as as a northeastern state, and Erie, PA was included as a Great Lake city only because one can spit into Lake Erie there. The preceding message was brought to you from the Motor City.--W8IMP 21:44, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

What about future projects, etc

What about a section about what to look forward to in detroit in the future.

Is there a time-line of any big changes that are planned for detroit? Tkjazzer 04:14, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, there are many big changes happening in Detroit, some of them are in the sub articles. Its difficult to properly inform readers when others denegrate it as promotion. Thomas Paine1776 21:27, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

didn't there used to be a train system in detroit that GM bought out and then destroyed?

I thought there was a train system in detroit that GM bought and then destroyed the tracks to make more money with cars. Is that true or a wives tale? If true, can we put a piece about it in this article or in an article about public transportation in detroit? Have the people watching the detroit articles seen the LA Trans articles on wikipedia?? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_County_Metropolitan_Transportation_Authority Where are they for detroit? Tkjazzer 04:17, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

People seem to have many negative misconceptions about Detroit and the auto companies. Where they get them is anyone's guess. The story you mention is just another pure fabrication, so you could call it another wives tale. Detroit and the region are studying a monorail/lightrail system from Detroit to Ann Arbor to complement the metro area's current mass transit. Detroit People Mover was one of the first of its kind. The City and GM promote its use, ridership is up for 2006. The Detroit auto companies are among the most philantropic and community aware companies on the earth. The LA transit article doesn't mention anything about the cost overruns, problems, and $ billions wasted for big digs. Why not ask is transportation in LA a disaster or is that just a wive's tale? Is it true that it takes 2 hours to get to work in LA or is that another wives tale? Thomas Paine1776 21:08, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

It's not a pure fabrication... he's probably thinking of Great American Streetcar Scandal. --W.marsh 21:41, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

The links claim the street car story is a fabrication too. Also, buses are more mobile than street cars. Every city in the world has buses. Detroit has a People Mover Monorail, thats better than Street Cars. The street trolley in baltimore is expensive and dangerous. The Detroit People Mover Monorail is off the street level and safe it links to the GM headquarters. Monorails are better than subways, no need for expensive subway digs. Thomas Paine1776 22:50, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi. The fact that the entire metro area's livelihood depends on the good financial health of the domestic auto industry should, at the very least, have some impact on the (non)construction of a rapid transit system. It didn't have to be active lobbying or even bribery, but perhaps just considerations of people's jobs.

The People Mover is hardly a substitute for a comprehensive rapid transit system. It wasn't finished until 1987, is less than 3 miles long and has a daily ridership of 11,000. Its right-of-way is clearly superior to something like the Baltimore light rail, but in usefulness can't match it. The 30 miles of light rail has three times the ridership of the People Mover. The PM is, in truth, a public relations project, designed to spur optimism in tourism, which it has done. If it actually covered distances you couldn't walk in 15 minutes, maybe someone might use it for commuting.--Loodog 23:40, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

It's not a pure fabrication, GM and others were convicted... but it was deemed to not really have been of much consequence. Which is true. Nevertheless there was an effort made. --W.marsh 13:08, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Reason for putting ad tag

The "Culture and contemporary life" section is in a serious need of rewriting. The picture of successful redevelopment that it presents would be optimistic for even much quicker redeveloping cities. One of the key statistics, the wealth of Oakland County, is in contradictions with wikipedia's Highest-income counties in the United States list, which shows it as only 26th; I am tempted to concur with Wikipedia's number, as this one seems culled from promotional literature. The source quoted for the "many younger professionals" move is plain commercial speech. Mentioning the high points of urban redevelopment without listing an urban area's problems creates an incorrect depiction. Much of this article suffers from a similar lack of counterpoints: quite a pity, given its wonderful language and wealth of sources. DarwinPeacock

The Detroit article is one of best among the cities, it is also among the more critical. No city encyclopedia articles are a litany of problems, no should they be. The footnote statistic for Oakland County is accurate, the quote says for more than "one million people." Some on the 100 list have populations of less than 20,000 people. Thomas Paine1776 20:51, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

To say that this article is one of the more critical is a vast overstatement. The fact that Detroit's population is half of what it was fifty years and is still continuing to drop is at least as notable as the redevelopment of its downtown; moreover, that fact makes its redevelopment successes all the more interesting. The rank of its crime rate is also significantly more notable than the rank of its population, or of the wealth of its suburbs (according to many statistics the crime rate is first in the country; and this is according to a very straightforward ranking). Surely these things deserve prominent mention -- they are now as much of the city's fame and legacy as its car making or its music. The article used to mention these themes prominently when it was awarded Feature Article status. Now it does not, and I believe it is a poorer enough article for it that it no longer deserves the laurels. Good language and profuse sources do not make up for a lack of objectivity in coverage. DarwinPeacock 05:18, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Appreciate your comments. But, again the Detroit article is one of the best. Point to a better one or even two. There seem to be some misperceptions about Detroit. Yankee fans are complementary of their visits to Detroit. Readers should not be given a pessimestic view of a city on the move. Comparative statistics are not necessarily valid. The Detroit article cites several critical areas which other featured city articles do not, if anything the Detroit article is among the more critical. And most featured city articles have no critical statements in their introductions. Detroit is seeing in influx of new residents with higher incomes so generalizations about the population declines are really not reflective. Also, currently Detroit's population density about double that of Phoenix and Dallas. So, let's be fair minded toward Detroit. Looking at populations of 50 years ago? That is not really objective. Detroit's freeways were among the first and most modern, for one thing, the metro region is historically mobile, and among the first to be so, it is also multiboundaried. Comparative crime rates are also not comparative. They only apply to a parts of a governed area. Detroit is much more than the confines of its city limit. Those figures do not portray an accurate picture of the city, and are unfair to its overall perception. In the multi-boundaried Detroit area, workers, residents, and business owners cross boundaries. The city of Detroit is confined on one side by an international border, its patterns are not caparable to land locked cities like Dallas or Atlanta which have radial patterns. Crime in downtown Detroit is lower than the national average and Detroit suburbs are among the safest in the nation. Detroit has had many large events downtown with supersized crowds, some exceeding 1 million people with harmonious relations between peoples of diverse backgrounds. Detroit's casinos employ 10,000 workers, all of which have to pass strict background checks. Detroit has wonderful neighborhoods. Suburbanites flock to the city for events in mass hoards. These objective truths can be distorted by general statements about crime and population. The city of Detroit has a balanced budget, and is using the extra funds to cleanup neighborhoods. Detroit's casinos are downplayed in the article and have had a positive impact. New York City is actually 5 cities, its crime rate says nothing about where its crime occurs. Detroit suburbs are among the most affluent in the nation, Oakland county is in the top 4 counties over one million people. Detroit is as safe, and perhaps more safe, than any other major city in areas frequented by tourists. You seemed to be misinformed about Oakland County. Why not keep an open mind.

Among other critical points the Detroit article discusses drug use, riots, white flight, and so on.

Wayne State University is in the heart of the City of Detroit. Wayne State reflects the harmonious relations among people in the Detroit metro area. Some who attempt to portray Detroit the otherway are simply mistaken on the whole. More than 16,500 white students attend Wayne State along with 8,889 black students, hispanpanic students, asian students. Most of the Student body at Wayne State is white. Despite many choices of schools for students in the suburbs from Oakland U. to MSU to U-M, suburban students attend WSU by the thousands. Detroit is friendly, safe, city with an active arts and cultural community.

Note, of the ten worst places to be black, Michigan is not on the list:

http://www.blackcommentator.com/146/146_cover_dixon_ten_worst.html

quote: "New York City and evirons are not much better a place to be black than Texas."

New York City article claims it to be as safe as Provo, Utah. Anyone who has been to Manhattan might question the objectivity of that. How safe is Miami, Orlando, Tampa, Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, Chicago?

There is not a single negative sentence in New York City's introduction or hardly any other featured city article. NYC article claims in a politcally correct fashion that "The Statue of Liberty greeted millions of immigrants as they came to America in the late 19th and early 20th centuries."

But how were those immigrants treated and greeted when they arrived in NYC? Anyone who knows history knows the answer. Perhaps someone can discuss that on the NYC discussion page. Thomas Paine1776 21:00, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

It is somewhat difficult to respond to your statement due to the length of it and the huge poutpouri of points you make, but I will try.

I want to stay focused and make, specifically, a case for the inclusion of a reference to the desolate state of urban Detroit in the introduction to this article. First of all, though I hate to flash credentials, let me point out that I am not some urban partisan of one city or another: I am a graduate student in urban studies, and my goal both on Wikipedia and in my academic career is to understand and describe urban processes. I agree with you in as much as most articles on cities on Wikipedia are exaggeratedly positive: alas, but boosters have their way on these topics. Most major city articles could use to be more critical. The Detroit one is simply one glaring example of the difference between real life and its presentation here.

You contradict yourself multiple times in your response (and, for the love of god, stop tinkering with it! It distorts the appearance of our conversation). How can you claim that New York City is "five cities" (only two of the boroughs were incorporated as cities before joining into a single city in 1898; today, they are tightly bound by transit and employment patterns) and yet demand that the unfocused, sprawling Detroit metropolitan area be considered one city? How can you stick to an arbitrary statistic about the wealth of Oakland county, and yet deny the significance of the fact that most statistics (even those that address metropolitan areas and not just urban municipalities) place Detroit near the top of the list of the most dangerous?

The point that this article needs to make is obviously not that the Detroit metropolitan area is poor or that it is deteriorated; both of those statements are obviously false. Rather, it needs to make it abundantly clear that the metropolitan area contains inside of it a vast segment of abandonment and crime that continues to be in decline for over five decades. The existence of upper middle class suburbs of relative wealth and low crime do nothing to make the deterioration of the urban core less notable; neither does the recent redevelopment of a piece of that core.

I must point out your focus on New York City is rather misguded -- its deterioration and crime are now of a historical character; if Wikipedia had existed twenty years ago, one can only hope that it would have focused on NYC's urban wasteland character more. In response to your other points, I would like to invite you to join me in patrolling the self-promotion of all city articles on Wikipedia. You are certainly right, many of them do deserve to be less positive. Let's start with this one.

But, alas, I doubt that you will accept my invitation. The history of your edits shows you spending much of your day chiseling away at the language of this page to make it more favorable towards its subject; are you paid to do this by the city's tourist bureau? In any case, I can only hope that the casual reader would know to pay this page same kind of attention they direct to the boosterist propaganda spread by local town publications. DarwinPeacock 02:39, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Agree muchly. The culture and contemporary life sections belong to wikitravel. The poverty rate is covered in demographics here, but with dry, automated prose, the same way a richer city like San Jose, California would mention it.--Loodog 15:26, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Appreciate the comments, and have made some adjustments. And to the forgoing, a city article without culture is what would be 'dry', 'automated', less readable, etc. I've helped to standardize several city articles and moderate the tone to avoid 'boosterism' as you call it. The Detroit article is among the more well written of the city articles. I'm certainly not paid for 'editing' here or whatever the assertion. Have endeavored to help each of the cities respectively to present a better article. No city encyclopedia articles are littany of complaints or problems nor should they be. They are not a thesis on problems or dramatized problematic causes. Criticism of a city of this type should be tactful. The Detroit article is critical, it discusses white flight, urban blight, riots, the poor, and so on. Of course, haven't stopped looking at critical avenues - Detroit has made enormous strides under that past two Mayors; though, its not appropriate for some desolate reference. Why not start with those articles that are void of content, there are many. Happy to clarify any alleged contradictions. Let's be fair, no city encyclopedia article contains negative statements in the introduction and neither should it. There are volumes, indeed a thesis, of positive information about Detroit that is still omitted. The intro is fine the way it is. Culture belongs in every city article, its a central component. Art and advancement deserve artful language. English is wonderful language, it doesn't have to be pessimestic or destructive. (BTW, the Detroit article has been vandalized). Once again, the statistic of Oakland county is accurate; it was another editor's statistic, and I'm well qualified to concur with it. A poor neighborhood doesn't mean it's a bad neighborhood, let's hope some aren't teaching that kind of pessimism. You seemed to be misinformed about Oakland County, so why not keep an open mind about Detroit. Be cautious of career idealism. Thomas Paine1776 20:50, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Good news is a great thing, art is not an ad. Thomas Paine1776 20:50, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

"Let's be fair, no city encyclopedia article contains negative statements in the introduction and neither should it." I don't believe you've looked at: Providence, Rhode Island, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Cleveland, Ohio.--Loodog 20:59, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Those statements should probably be removed from those articles, thanks for pointing out the very few exceptions. Put negativisms in NYC intro and see how long it lasts. The bent on negative jingoisms is really not appropriate for city introductions. Let's be fair to cities. The criticisms are discussed in the articles. As you may recall, you and I reached a reasonable compromise on a negative/positive statement only to find it later removed, worsened. Negativisms are really not appropriate for city introductions for a variety of reasons. The intro is actually just right now, so let's just leave it. Thomas Paine1776 21:58, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

The USA introduction has none of these pessimistic negativisms, nor should it. Thomas Paine1776 21:58, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

To be against so called 'boosterism,' is not to be for negativism and problem thumping drama is it?Thomas Paine1776 21:59, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Putting aside the issue of boosterism, there's the question of what should be in an intro.

• WPcities has a general format for city articles to follow. It says nothing about omitting negatives in city article. It says to mention what's "notable" or "unique", which could, in general, be positive or negative qualities.

• Wikipedia:Lead section states "The lead should be capable of standing alone as a concise overview of the article, establishing context, summarizing the most important points, explaining why the subject is interesting or notable, and briefly describing its notable controversies, if there are any." Again, no preclusion of negative comments if notable or interesting.--Loodog 22:08, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Future section

I think there should be a section about what proposed things are happening for detroit. What is the city planning? Tkjazzer 04:35, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

The city articles I've seen have shyed away from prophesizing. Wikipedia isn't a time portal, plus, descriptions of future development tend to get boostery.--Loodog 14:23, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

The How Great Detroit Is section, er.. i mean "New Changes"

Nothing like this section appears in any other city articles. We don't need a long list of how great Detroit's public relations committee says the city is. If you want one, put it in a separate article, not here, where it's already covered later. A city isn't defined by how many buildings it's currently putting up.--Loodog 16:21, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree. —MJCdetroit 16:36, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

So why can't we change?

I slightly see your'e point Loodog.I think I could edit what's in the history and just put a bold heading above it that says Improvments. Does that sound good anyone?

TheCoolOne99 02:05, 17 July 2007 (UTC)TheCoolOne99

No, if the city wants to declare its new projects, I can understand a very terse version of it to contrast its earlier history, but take a look at the format given by wikiproject cities. There's no place for it. If we are to include anything, I can only see excusing it as part of the history section.--Loodog 02:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Also, please don't make any changes until we've agreed on them. I suggest checking out other city articles first, especially, the featured ones, as that's the goal.--Loodog 02:57, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

So I tried helping and i got shot down.Putting a tiny little paragraph in the "HISTORY" section isn't going to let people know of our PROGRESS.So from there on I thought of the "New Changes" section to show the progress and the changes that have been added to detroit.Other Cities Don't need them because they all have good reputations.So quite frankly we NEED this section and if there isn't one then you might as well give up on making Detroit's progress known on Wikipedia because people aren't going to read a tiny few sentances in the history section. And it doesn't even make sense in the first place to put it in the history section because it's not so much history but current.So unless you agree that we need a new progress section then Forever Goodbye.

-TheCoolOne99

City articles are not supposed to be advertisements designed to provide a public image. This is an encyclopedia, not the Detroit tourism website. Compare this city article to others. Also, please read the section we've already started about this issue, and make your arguments there.--Loodog 22:33, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Why can't we just put a title next to the "improvments" titled city improvments or something?? We don't have to have it as a Title of a Section next to the history.

• All cities have improvements... that's why they're cities and not empty fields. --W.marsh 00:30, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

No. If you'd like to make these types of edits clearing misconceptions about Detroit, I suggest wikitravel]. That is an open-source cooperative with the goal improving tourism. Boosterism, and remarks about how the much city has changed are very welcome there.

Wikipedia is guided by its Five Pillars, which directly contradict with excesses of this. If we allowed boosterish "isn't our city great?" discourses on one city article, every city article now has to have it. Suddenly notable facts like Pittsburgh's paper street's, Los Angeles's precarious geology, or Cleveland's recurring problems with its public schools are buried under long lists of buildings about to be erected, parks to be built, and repeated use of the phrase "world-renown". A city article should be a terse summary of its history, its economic support, its people, its fabric, its contributions, as well as its struggles.--Loodog 02:33, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

There is no mandate for negativism, pessimism, or a hammer and sickle world view.Thomas Paine1776 19:25, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Neither did I say so (but thanks for beating up a straw man anyway). However, if Detroit as a city is notable because a disproportionate number of its citizens are in poverty (say >30% [17]), then both WPcities and Wikipedia:Lead section mandate that it must be mentioned, COMPLETELY IRRESPECTIVE OF ITS "NEGATIVITY", since it's notable.--Loodog 20:23, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

improve sub articles instead of fighting over this

People could create a ton of quality sub-articles and then link them to this article via a nice city template. I still think there are public trans articles which could be improved verses other cities' Public trans articles. I still would like to see an article about the rumor that GM assisted in the removal of train tracks in the Detroit area to bolster the auto industry. Even if controversial, there should be a neutral article on this. Tkjazzer 13:50, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Tkjazzer has an excellent point. There's all the space in the world to talk about Detroit's new construction in a separate article. The Providence, Rhode Island article has done something like this with Recent construction projects in Providence. The main point is that the main article doesn't have the space for this level of detail, especially when its disproportionate to the level of detail of the article as a whole.--Loodog 14:01, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

New Detroit

I created and article entitled New Detroit which lists all the projects and planning happening and what it's doing for the city.Please take a look and leave me comments before editing=)—Preceding unsigned comment added by TheCoolOne99 (talk • contribs)

Some constructive criticism:

• The term "New Detroit" might not be the most encyclopedic, especially since I can't find "New Detroit" recognized as anything official, except for a nonprofit organization trying to improve race relations. Also, sounds like a buzzword. Recommend moving article to something a bit more detached like Recent construction in Detroit.
• The article has no sources on it (as yet). Recommend providing sources for all projects.
• Article is entirely in list format. Which, for the purpose I think you intend, is generally discouraged in wikipedia. Read listcruft for why. I get the sense you want to convey the economic energy the new projects have breathed into the city. Recommend expanding into dynamic prose, maybe giving a timeline of the developments in paragraph form, explaining how projects got underway, who's developing, the government's involvement, something that gives a sense of the political and social environment in which these developments are rising.

Good luck with it.--Loodog 00:20, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Also, you seem to have a few recurrent typos: commas should have spaces after them, a few spellings are off, and some extra Capitalization. I'd recommend a good copy-editing before you save changes to the page.--Loodog 00:45, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

I think we have reached a content point.

I think that all of us are content with both articles of Detroit and new Detroit and they are doing very well to provide information.

TheCoolOne99 18:13, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Ending history

I have changed this: "More accelerated urban development in Detroit is a mainstay in the city's efforts to reinvent itself as a new Detroit through tourism, neighborhoods, and economic activity."

back to this: "This new urban development in Detroit is a mainstay in the city's earnest desire to reinvent its economic identity through tourism."

1. "More accelerated" is inaccurate since the developments aren't coming in any faster. Language depicts snowballing. The city also doesn't choose to have immense development though it can provide auspicious conditions, so the sentence is wrong grammatically as the city is a passive agent.
2. Whether the city "reinvents itself through neighborhoods" is of debate. There are points of contention as to whether the neighborhoods are even seeing any of the newfound downtown spending, which is a point of contention in all US cities trying to improve their downtown image. Another one.
3. "economic activity" is vague and egregiously superficial. What kind of "economic activity"? For sure, there's economic activity in tourism now, which is already mentioned. If we could say something like Detroit is trying to invite new development in financial services, for example, we could avoid ambiguous and unsourced additions like "economic activity".
4. "Reinvent itself through neighborhoods" or "Revinvent itself through economic activity" are also classic wikipedia anti-contextualism: insertion of an additional phrase or word without regard for the wording around it or parallel structure. "Reinvent itself through tourism" does not sound absurd; I can't say the same for the other two.

--Loodog 23:17, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Detroit's different in many ways

Detroit is different in the sense that it has such a bad reputation.Terms like new visions need be used because that's what they are. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheCoolOne99 (talk • contribs) 19:56, August 29, 2007 (UTC)

Bloated number of population stastistics in lead

As of right now, we have five different population figures for differently defined areas in the introductory paragraph:

• City proper
• Metropolitan area
• Urbanized area
• Metropolitan statistical area
• Windsor-Detroit

These should be in "demographics". But to give some sense of the scale of the city, anything more than three in the intro is excessive detail, especially when the larger areas are 4, 4.5, 5.5, and 6 million respectively. I would favor city proper, metro area, and Windsor-Detroit figures (if we can get a source for the latter).--Loodog 03:59, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Do you actually care? seriously mate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.89.103.84 (talk) 04:32, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Put your hands up 4 detroit.

I luvv this city. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.89.103.84 (talk) 04:24, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

This is not a useful comment but I wont comment because if you like Detroit so much, chances are you would shoot me.71.238.71.180 15:34, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

The Intro should include...

These items don't each have to be addressed in their own article paragraph, but it's simplest to list them separately here.

I'd say there should be a brief mention of the following:

• Pronunciation of "Detroit"
• City's origin, reason for existence. (Major port, french, etc.)
• City's size (absolute as well as relative)
• What constitutes "Detroit" in various usages (metro area, etc.)
• Nicknames for the city
• Most important cultural contributions (basically, motown and techno)
• The aspects of Detroit's history that best explain the city as it is today:
  • henry ford,
  • world war two,
  • the rise of suburbia / population loss,
  • the decline of the american automotive industry,
  • racial and economic tension,
  • attempts to revive the city, and how successful they have been (for this we need hard statistics on job loss and creation, economic numbers, etc.)

Tlogmer ( talk / contributions ) 06:23, 26 March 2007 (UTC)