Jump to content

Talk:Over-the-Rhine/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

NRHP rating

I almost rated this a B, but the second half of the article (the Attractions section down) reads very advert-ey. Looks like a lot of it was added recently too, likely by friends of iRhine.com. If the info was made more NPOV, it'd improve the article tremendously. --Ebyabe 17:28, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I removed the advertisements and cleaned up some other minor issues with the page. It could use more pictures maybe. pw 00:44, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
It looks like the "Attractions" section is still there. It does sound a little like an advertisement. Perhaps "Landmarks" is a more encyclopedic heading? —Preceding unsigned comment added by J.H (talk • contribs) 21:05, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

POV in 2001 riots section

This sentence under "2001 riots" states, "The claim that Timothy Thomas appeared to be pulling out a weapon has been discredited, as many witnesses saw the young man with his arms in the air." The cited reference for this statement is http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2001/09/27/loc_text_of_judge.html. I've read that entire article and found that it actually states exactly the opposite. That is, "Timothy Thomas did not stop for any officer that night, including Police Officer Roach, and he failed to show his hands when ordered to do so by Officer Roach in a dark alley. Instead, he quickly reached in or quickly pulled on his waistband. Police Officer Roach's training took effect and Police Officer Roach fired on Timothy Thomas, killing him." Then Roach was acquitted.

I'm not sure if this was an intentional manipulation of the resource or not, but I'm going to rewrite the section to reflect the cited resources. I only mention it here because there might have been a citation error. J.H (talk) 20:56, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Vibrant diversity?

The article talks about an almost 80% majority in 2000 and also calls Over-the-Rhine to have been at that time "a celebrated example of vibrant diversity". Could somebody please explain to me what is meant by "diversity" in America today? (I'm German). In today's logic - would you call 90% more or less diverse? 217.236.244.250 (talk) 22:12, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I think that's a logical argument. Someone else added it, and it is not sourced, though the part about being an infamous ghetto is sourced. J.H (talk) 02:11, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


That is a valid argument, and you've pointed out a case of double-standards. Thank you very much.

Television show> Over The Rhine: The Series

The series certainly deserves a mention in this article, but I find it hard to believe that it's important enough to receive its own section. Maybe if it was picked up by a television network it would get its own section, but according to the WCPO article the series is being "shopped around" to networks. So if the series takes off we should give it more prominence in this article, but until then a mention will do. Please remember this article is about the neighborhood, and due to its length should only contain information that is relevant to Over-the-Rhine. (ex. The people who star in the series is not relevant.) If you would like to create a wiki article for the series with more detailed information then that would be great. We could link to it from this article. If you believe this is unfair please respond. Thanks. J.H (talk) 02:07, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

POV and Rival Factions Emerge, Register Controversy and 1985 Plan

These sections do not demonstrate a neutral point of view. They rely almost exclusively a single source, one that is advocating a particular side of the neighborhood dispute in question. A wider variety of opinions and other documentary sources needs to be included for these three sections to meet wikipedia's standards of objectivity.Patclifford (talk) 01:32, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Please be more specific about why the sections are POV. Stating they rely on one source is an exaggeration, although one source is more heavily cited simply because it is full-length book. Naturally, a book would be cited more often than a one, two or three page news article. If there are additional sources that should be cited then you should post them. J.H (talk) 16:25, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Business listing

I think there should be a list of notable businesses in OTR like Shadeau Breads and Grammer's as OTR has become a destination neighborhood once again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rally180 (talk • contribs) 16:05, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

I second this idea. OTRcincy (talk) 10:56, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
This is not a brochure for OTR, this is an encyclopedia-style article. 74.140.8.205 (talk) 03:56, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
Of course it is not a brochure. This is wikipedia. To discuss the "Merchants on Main" or OTR Chamber of Commerce groups would not seem out of character for an article about a specific neighborhood. This is especially true with certain businesses that are uniquely tied to OTR, either its longer history like Smitty's or Rohs or its newer changes such as Park + Vine and Senate. Christian Moerlein is another example. OTRcincy (talk) 07:29, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
I would be in favour if and only if the 'listing' can be done in meaningful prose and not as a list. This page does not need more inane lists. Nate Wessel (talk) 13:45, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Article Size

This article seems rather long and tedious to read in one sitting. I have a few ideas for shortening it by splitting it into smaller, more specific articles. Does anyone agree with me? Here is some info from Wikipedia:

About the Over-the-Rhine page: "This page is 98 kilobytes long. It may be appropriate to split this article into smaller, more specific articles. See Wikipedia: Wikipedia:Article_size."

Here are some guidelines about article size: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Article_size#A_rule_of_thumb — Preceding unsigned comment added by OTRcincy (talk • contribs) 10:37, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

The article itself was not too long by Wikipedia standards, which is better calculated by word count. It only appeared to be long due to extensive use of several hundred references. If the history section is to be moved to its own article, then a two or three paragraph summary should be placed in the history section. 74.140.8.205 (talk) 03:55, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

References

There are some ref issues in the 180s. I don't know how to fix them. OTRcincy (talk) 12:58, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Pendleton

Pendleton is a neighborhood but also a subdistrict of OTR and that should be reflected in the map. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OTRcincy (talk • contribs) 05:03, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Gatway Quarter

Recommending the section "Gateway Quarter" to be removed. I cannot find any mention of such a section dated before 2003. I contend it is propaganda from 3CDC.Ketchupstan (talk) 02:52, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Path of the Miami Canal

It would be helpful to add the former path of the Miami and Erie Canal through Cincinnati to the map. The article stresses that this is the source of the name, yet it isn't clear on which side the canal flowed. There is a different map at that shows the canal path, but it would be nice if there were a merged version showing both the neighborhood boundaries and the canal path. Nolandda (talk) 23:24, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

German article

Note: This definetely should get an article at the German wiki, de:Over-the-Rhine :) -- Horst-schlaemma (talk) 11:57, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Pendelton, inclusion of

Pendelton is not considered by most people to be a part of over-the-rhine. It has it's own community council, and shows up on every map I've ever seen, including the ones in this article outside of the boundaries of OTR. Many people do casually speak of it as part of OTR, but in the same kind of way that people call UC and CUF "Clifton". They're wrong, and if you press them, they know they're wrong. I suggest changing references to Pendelton to make clear that it is a distinct unit. Nate Wessel (talk) 14:07, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

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

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

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

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

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:49, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

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

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

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:40, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Historic restoration section badly needs an update

The information is ten to twenty years old, and there have been huge changes in OTR valereee (talk) 16:52, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Archive 1
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Over-the-Rhine/Archive_1&oldid=1029211759"