Talk:Denver/Archive 2007

List or Link All Area Universities and Colleges
The educational institutions in the Denver area constitute part of it's cultural and economic wealth and absolutely need to be included in a comprehensive and not just a passing way.

71.208.207.189 20:18, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Get to FA
 * The history section is, in my opinion, the weakest in the entire article. It starts out fine, but then diverges into assorted historical anecdotes without anything tying them together (At one point, the section goes from the 1908 convention to the 1976 Olympics, pretty big jump). Part of the problem is that some of the interesting historical information is (rightly) in other parts of the article, but I think we should strive to tell a single, simple history of Denver instead of interesting pieces of that history. Vertigo700 16:46, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I think you might look at the Chicago (and San Francisco) article as a way to make it better. Trodaikid1983 07:25, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Think about fewer lists of things and more paragraphs.  I think we've done a good job of this.Trodaikid1983 18:50, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The Hosting stuff under Sports may need to be cut down a bit. The Sports section is smaller than that of Chicago and San Francisco and other cities of this size. Trodaikid1983 07:26, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Try looking into the history for elements that are of broad interest.
 * Climate seems a bit big--how about a graph that summarizes the climate instead of the 2 tables? Climate has been cleaned up considerably. Trodaikid1983 07:17, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Are there neighborhood articles for Denver? Hilltop? 5 Points? LoDo? Bonnie Brae? A paragraph about these might be good content. There was and it became too large. A separate article was created, which is listed directly under the neighborhood article on this article. Soapy 20:20, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Linked to denvergov.org's pdf map of Denver's neighborhoods in external links. Moonburn 09:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I also do not see anything about all the houses in Denver being brick after the fires in the 1920s. This is something that stands out, to me at least I took the liberty to strike this as every single city in the U.S. that had a major fire went from wood to brick, as well as those without fires. I don't see this as the least bit necessary to include. Soapy 20:16, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Please punctuate your refs correctly.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:FN#Where_to_place_ref_tags I think this has been cleaned up correctly. Trodaikid1983 07:14, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
 * The lead is killing me: it's way too busy, and not enticing or compelling. The lead follows most US cities by stating general census information, elevation, founding, etc ... Trodaikid1983 07:19, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Some of the sections are short and stubby. Sections have been cleaned up dramatically. Trodaikid1983 18:50, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Is all of that See also necessary, or can some of it be incorporated into the article? Much of the information in the "See also" section was once included here but removed as sections in this article became too large, such as the music section that attempted to list every single band that ever played in Denver, or the listing of every single radio station, etc. Soapy 20:16, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

History of Denver
I see that recently someone put "Main article: History of Denver." There is no main article for the history of Denver, but I would love to see one! Denver has a great old west history of crime and corruption. I know I would write a nice section on crime in the early days (1879-1896), where as friends of mine, and relatives of the Blonger name would surely be interested in writing about crime following my part, and well into the 1920's. Anyone who knows the general history wish to start? Soapy 00:49, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

The main article, "History of Denver" is up! There is a lot of missing history there guys...dig in! Soapy 22:14, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

The inset photo of James W. Denver says that he never visited the city named after him. This would be remarkable, since he lived until 1892. I have a reference (Robert L. Brown, 1985, "The Great Pikes Peak Gold Rush") that says that James W. Denver visited Denver, Colorado at least twice: 1875 and 1882. Anyone have information to the contrary?Plazak 03:29, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Media
I think that an important thing to add to the media section is the 3 main satellite/cable TV companies are here. Dish network (Echostar), Direct TV, and Comcast (AT&T / TCI). The main reason they're here is because they can see the entire North Western hemisphere of the Earth with there HPA's (High powered antenna) because of the altiduted. Echostar isn't found directly in Denver but if I remember right it's in Fort Collins. When I talk about I don't mean their HQ but a uplink facilities. What do you guys think?Eiceman 01:20, 13 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Sure, as long as you have sources. I know Echostar has a large office in DTC, but I don't think it is an uplink facility.  --BetaCentauri 06:00, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep in mind that while it is interesting that the Denver area has a lot of cable companies, it might be more appropriate for that content to go in the Denver-Aurora Metropolitan Area page instead of Denver. If a lot of these companies are based in the suburbs or even further, then that is where the information should go instead of Denver. Besides, those pages can use a lot more information, whereas the Denver page is nearing too big if it's not there already. Vertigo700 08:10, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree with all, and as a clarification of media as it pertains to this article, the general idea there is not necessarily adding media providers, such as Comcast (Denver), EchoStar (Englewood), etc ... but more like the media outlets. Basically the channels of media, not the mode of media. I agree it's important as a mention, but I think it would be better suited in the Denver-Aurora Metropolitan Area page as well. Trodaikid1983 17:42, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Is it necessary to list every TV station, their owners, etc.? I note that there are 40 radio stations...will someone soon be listing them all? Let's get the yellow pages and start listing all the other businesses in Denver that serve the public. Why stop there? List all the current city government officials who serve the populace. Get out the White pages and let's list all the people who live in Denver, LOL. Where is the line drawn? Soapy 16:37, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree...I think that kind of information (if needed at all) belongs on a media of Denver page and not on the main one. Vertigo700 16:47, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

CORE Magazine is one of the largest publications representing the city and should be included in the media section. It appears that someone attempted to do this without first discussing it here and it was rebuffed as being promotional. Other than the Denver Post, it is the largest, local media outlet in the area. There is plenty of documentation to attest to this - it would be a shame to leave it off. amylopan Amylopan (talk) 21:45, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Then you need to add the attribution that shows it is a large, important media outlet. Personally, I've never heard of it and I have lived in Denver for 23 years, so I have a hard time believing it would be. HOwever, if you have attribution, please add it. Otherwise, I think it is completely valid to take it out as being promotional. Vertigo700 (talk) 00:29, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I've lived in Denver for 21 of the last 30 years, and I too have never heard of CORE Magazine. Amylopan says that it is bigger here than the Rocky Mountain News?  This I have to see!Plazak (talk) 00:35, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay, I have PDF scans of several recent issues of CORE (here, here, here and here), as well as a copy of a Denver Post feature about the CEO of the magazine (here). CORE is the only urban multicultural publication in the state. You will find very prominent local figures on the covers of these magazines. Google search results for "Denver Magazine" will return CORE as the third entry. I see that alternative publications such as Out Front Colorado are readily listed on Wikipedia. Why not CORE, a large representation for the multicultural community? Will these attributions suffice? amylopanAmylopan (talk) 17:06, 7 December 2007 (UTC)


 * No one is saying it's not a real magazine, just that it's not a large, important media outlet. The Denver Post article is about the founder not about the magazine.  What a convincing reference would look like would be a mention of CORE in a list of Denver related media outlets published somewhere other than Denver, and published independently from CORE.  Wikipedia articles are not to be used for advertising or promotion, please see What Wikipedia is not.  Not to put too fine a point on it, but this post (attributed to CORE Magazine) would suggest CORE pays attention to and is interested in its search engine ratings.  Please note that links from Wikipedia are tagged with "no follow" which makes them not affect Google page ranks.  -- Rick Block (talk) 19:50, 7 December 2007 (UTC)


 * {copied from user talk:Rick Block) Hi Rick,


 * I reached out to the CEO of CORE Magazine, as I am very passionate about seeing its inclusion on Wikipedia. I am in no way professionally affiliated with this publication, rather I know the impact it has had on the local urban community and it deserves to be recognized for its merit.


 * Here is Bruce Hunter, CEO of CORE Magazine's reply to your last comments:


 * 1. "CORE is not a large and important media outlet?"  What is the criteria for large and important?  They have included 5280 Magazine and Out Front Colorado newspaper.  What was the standard or criteria for considering a publication large and important?  Is the multicultural community not large and important?  This demographic makes up 51% of the population in the Denver Metro Area.   Why are there no references on Wikipedia's Denver Media page to any African American, Hispanic, or Asian publications?


 * 2.  "What a convincing reference would look like would be a mention of CORE in a list of Denver related media outlets published somewhere other than Denver and published independently from CORE." Again to demonstrate that there seem to be other "questionable reasons" to exclude CORE, I typed Denver Media Outlets in Google and CORE came up in the "first" reference http://www.easymedialist.com/usa/city/denver.html and this is published independently of CORE.  I did not see 5280 magazine or Out Front Colorado on this list.


 * Additionally, I do not think that I should have to do this, but I will.  According to Wikipedia, one of the largest media outlets is the Denver Post.  They are one of our biggest competitors.  I will ask the Editor of the Denver Post to email the Wikipedia editors directly to give his opinion on whether CORE is a large and important media outlet.  I do not think I could provide stronger independent documentation than this.  My only caveat is that if I am forced to do this, I will speak openly of what was required of me by Wikipedia.


 * 3. " Wikipedia articles are not be used for advertising or promotion." I have never tried to use Wikipedia for this purpose and they do not document anything to suggest that I have.  Again, CORE just wants the opportunity to compete for inclusion on the "same playing field" as 5280 and Out Front Colorado.


 * 4. "Not to put an fine point on it, but this post (attributed to CORE Magazine) would suggest CORE pays attention to and is interested in its search engine rankings."    First of all, the post they are referring to was plagiarized and stolen evidenced by the fact that there is no attribution to CORE Magazine.  If I had tried to use this type of documentation on Wikipedia, what would they say?  Secondly, an article on search engine optimization does not suggest that CORE pays attention to search engine rankings; it just means that we wrote about it for our readership.  Thirdly, Wikipedia links are tagged with no follow so it is not possible to get a search engine benefit.  What is the relevance of this "fine point" for consideration for inclusion on Wikipedia?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amylopan (talk • contribs) 21:27, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * You ask what would be a good criterion for large and important. How about circulation figures?  That should settle the question objectively.  Plazak (talk) 22:24, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * The only magazines that are currently mentioned in the article are those that are notable enough to have Wikipedia articles. The simplest way of deciding this matter would be to write an article about CORE and see if it survives AfD. If it does we can link to it and if it doesn't we won't. ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 22:35, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I think that is a good point, because what this guy keeps doing is adding this sentence about CORE, just so he can have a direct link to the magazine's Web site. The other publications all have wikipedia articles they link to, until the same could be said about CORE (and hopefully something that shows it's importance, not just a publicity-getting article), I just don't think it's appropriate to include it.Vertigo700 (talk) 00:53, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

As long as we're on the subject, why is the Onion listed under Denver media? It is a New York publication with no local content except ad content. Plazak (talk) 19:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * That's not true at all. Pick up the Onion in Denver and you'll see it has its own arts and entrainment content with local calendars, interviews and stories unique to Denver. This |This link shows that each city where the Onion is distributed has similar local content.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vertigo700 (talk • contribs) 21:46, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism
The page has been fairly obviously vandalised recently. I don't know anything about Denver, and I'd prefer to just leave it as it is rather then delete what's already there - someone that knows something might want to fix it.

Unless it actually is "gayer then west hollywood" -124.177.200.217 05:40, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Argh. Okay, that doesn't seem to be there anymore. I or my ISP might have some sort of weird caching problem I'll have to check out. 124.177.200.217 05:42, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Who keeps removing the information about "The Fray" in the music section? It's true, and its something to "give" the article. I think it needs it. In my opinion, the part about "The Fray" is NOT VANDALISIM! Binglebongle2000 02:18, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I removed your addition of The Fray, which you had written, "Also,a popular band, "The Frey", riginated in close-by Thornton." No one said your addition was vandalism. Nothing was mentioned in my removal about vandalism. My exact wording was, "I deleted info on band because Thornton is a nearby city, but is not Denver therefore info does not belong here." Being in "close-by Thornton" is not enough to warrant a listing in the Denver article. Either is playing in Denver. Can you imagine if we listed every band that ever played in Denver? Please note that the "Music" section of this article is general information not a listing of bands. Note that another article was created, Music in Denver. The link to that article is directly above the "music" section. The Fray is mentioned on the "Music in Denver" article, although if they are a Thornton band then they should not be listed there. I'll let editors interested in that music article decide how they want that page setup. Are you aware there is a Thornton, Colorado article? Perhaps it would be better suited there.  Soapy 03:55, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

By the way, I've lived in Denver for eight years, and there is definatly more info to give to this article.Binglebongle2000 02:20, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I never said that I wrote that! I do, however know the person who does, and yes, it was called vandalism. ALso, if you remove the article about The Fray, you should should also remove the part about Boulder. Binglebongle2000 03:55, 3 March 2007 (UTC) You see, seeing that The Fray is a very popular band and had 4 grammy nomitations, I think that it would add something to the article. And i have a strong feeling that many people (mostly Denver citizens, which you obviously are NOT) agree with me.


 * I am a little confused here? What do you mean, "I never said that that I wrote that"? You wrote it and signed it! (see above). You write "I do, however know the person who does, and yes, it was called vandalism." Yet I see nothing in the editing of the main article that mentions "vandalism" except from you? Was this perhaps a private conversation you had with another editor or something?

I was the one who deleted the information and said nothing about vandalism. The fact that The Fray is very popular is irrelevant. It has nothing to do with Denver and everything to do with the neighboring city of Thornton, as you originally stated in your article posting. If you look at the "neighborhood" discussions from a while back there was a problem with editors listing information about neighborhoods and cities near Denver but having really nothing to do with Denver, just like the blurb on Boulder that you mentioned does not belong. It all had to be trimmed back as it was getting out of control. What normally happens is that once too much information is added about a topic, like music in Denver another editor will create a new main article and transfer much of the information there so that the Denver article stays within boundaries and does not become overly large.

If there is some information that perhaps you did not include on The Frey that directly links to the city of Denver, besides having played there, then by all means add it. They are still listed in music in Denver.

You are very correct about the Boulder mention not belonging where it is. I agree it should be removed.

Finally, please refrain from personal attacks...yes, I have lived in Denver. My family has an interesting history in nineteenth century Denver and has been there since 1879. Soapy 16:17, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * P.S. I deleted the information on Boulder musicians playing in Denver as you had mentioned. I am sure musicians from all over Colorado come and play in Denver. No need to list all the cities. Can you imagine how out of control it can get? A good example is the Seattle article. There is way too much unneeded information on surrounding neighborhoods and local issues. Sarcastically, the only thing they are missing is the day and hour of trash pick-up for each street, :)  Soapy 16:33, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about the personal attacks i am kinda new here. Not exactly sure what personal attacks are but will read up on it. If anyone has anything against me putting the info about The Fray in the Thornton article please let me know. But also, I think that one of the members of The Fray is a DEnver native, but the band was started in Thornton. If anyone is scepticle or has any more information to give me, let me know, I'm all ears (or should I say eyes) Thanks! Binglebongle2000 18:19, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Who added the Infobox template
Just curious, who added the Infobox template? I don't know what's wrong with the current one? Trodaikid1983 19:41, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

It suggests that we need a county template, which I think is irrelevant since Denver is a consolidated city county. I will remove shortly. If there are objections than we can comment further on this talk page. Vertigo700 20:49, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

New Archives
Added the tail end of 2006 to the archives. Figured we might as well since it's already a good quarter into 2007. If anyone takes issue then please comment here and perhaps we can change all or part of it back. Vertigo700 20:21, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Sports?
DOn't you think that we should show the CURRENT sports team's names instead of the old ones. It would cut down the sports article and make it more up-to-date.Tell me what you think. Binglebongle2000 21:40, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Og, nevermind. just read about that. SHould we mention The Outlaws, Denver, OTHER lacrosse team?Binglebongle2000 21:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I just gave the sports section a much needed overhaul, moving the old teams and event hosting information into its own article. --MattWright (talk) 22:26, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Looks good Matt. I agree that it was long overdue. Vertigo700 01:10, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

colored county maps...
I created a colored/bordered map of the county svg file to match the look of the USA map in the infobox. Do people prefer the old style or the new? I could also generate colored ones for the remaining counties as well if that is more popular. --MattWright (talk) 18:14, 30 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I definitely prefer your version. Much cleaner looking. Vertigo700 21:22, 30 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Matt, I like the new style. Similar maps have been created for North Carolina counties and I'm in the process of making some for Illinois (with plans for Pennsylvania and Louisiana next).  Anyway, you may want to consider using this file (Image:Colorado Locator Map.PNGas the base for Colorado's highlighted maps.  Its part of the series that is used as the base for other states and has the proper geographic layout to be calibrated to use locator dots based on the coordinates of a city.  VerruckteDan 21:55, 30 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the heads up -- is there any reason PNG's are being used over SVG? With SVG, the image can be resized upwards without losing quality. --MattWright (talk) 23:08, 30 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure about the decision process behind the file extensions. Check with User:Ruhrfisch, he's the creator of the state locator maps.  VerruckteDan 23:20, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Remove "To Do" list?
It seems like most of these things have been covered, does anyone object to me deleting it? Trodaikid1983 04:37, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
 * why not just update it? After all, the article isn't a featured article yet. Judgesurreal777 19:46, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
 * This too would work. We should all perhaps list NEW suggestions for the list? I'll go back through it and update as necessary. Trodaikid1983 07:04, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Alright so myself and Soapy cleaned up the list quite a bit, but crossed out stuff instead of deleting it, so that it can be referenced. Thanks for the help! Trodaikid1983 07:29, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Colorado Map
Do we really need to have the Colorado highlighted map in the infobox? I think most people know where the state is, and I am not sure of its use on a city page. Does this mean every city in Colorado should have a Colorado highlighted map? And mainly, I think it makes the infobox too long on awkward. Unless there is some overwhelming consensus in defense of the map, I think I will delete it shortly. Vertigo700 09:33, 22 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I would like to find a way to shrink them and put the two side by side. I think the US map can be useful for people outside U.S., and even for some people in U.S. who don't know location of CO. I agree that it currently makes it rather long, however, so I don't mind if it is removed. --MattWright (talk) 16:28, 22 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I think the map highlighting Colorado's location in the US should be kept. First, Wikipeida is for a global audience and as MattWright pointed out, non-American users are probably not as familiar with the locations of US states.  Second, I find Matt's point that Americans may not know Colorado's location also very valid.  As for the length of the infobox, I don't think its too long.  There is a lot of information about a city that needs to be presented in the boxes, so they will inherently get lengthy.  However, in relation to the size of Denver's article, I feel the infobox is an appropriate scale.  VerruckteDan 17:19, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Hmm, while the world focus argument does make sense to me, I am still not convinced the Colorado highlight map is necessary. If you look at other U.S. cities: San Francisco, Chicago, Louisville, Boston, or even Canadian cities like Calgary, none have a map highlighting the state/province in the country in their infobox or otherwise. Frankly, I think it is because it is unecessary. A link to Colorado is conviniently provided in the infobox and in the lede of the article, if people wanted to know where Colorado is in relation to the rest of the country, that information is available in only one mouse click away. I just think it's very unnecessary and very clunky on the page. As per MattWright (talk)'s suggestion: I think if we shrunk the Denver highlighted map, it would be very difficult to see the city, as obviously Denver county is one of the smallest in the state. I suppose you could tinker with it, but in my the Colorado highlighted map should just be removed. Vertigo700 20:38, 22 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Its true that currently most (and probably almost all) US and Canadian cities don't show a state or province highlighted map, but I don't think that means including one is wrong and/or unnecessary.  The map highlighting Colorado provides a frame of reference for the map highlighting Denver, without this frame of reference its just a map with a rectangle and a red area in the middle.  I think the current state of city infoboxes only including map showing the city within a state/province is a reflection of two traits of editors.  First, most are probably American and second, I'd imagine editors working on geography related articles are more familiar with the geographic locations of places.  If we all step back and view the page from the perspective of the average Wikipedia user (not an editor), I think the advantages and need for the dual maps become apparent.


 * I do see your point about the links to Colorado provided at the top of the page, but I think the whole purpose of infoboxes is to provide a quick overview of the key facts on the article's subject. A city's location is probably one of the most important of these keys facts.  I'd argue that the dual map setup is the better of the 2 options in quickly providing the reader with a reference to a city's location.


 * Finally, I'd be opposed to making the maps smaller than they currently are due to readability issues. VerruckteDan 21:11, 22 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I personally think the current format is fine. Good readability, concurrent to a worldwide viewing population, and not too distracting.  I agree with VerruckteDan. Jmlk17 21:32, 22 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Since it appears most people are in support of the graphic, I guess it stays. I would like to still see if there are ways we can tinker with the infobox to make it smaller or less obtrusive. Perhaps, some editing similar to what was done with the climate stats box? Vertigo700 03:26, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a good idea. A smaller graphic would probably be a good idea as well. Jmlk17 04:17, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

GA on hold
This article has been reviewed as part of WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed.


 * Image:Gonzales-DenverPL-002.jpg and Image:RMN Cover May 2 06.jpg need fair use rationales
 * External links only belong in the external links section
 * Some references are improperly formatted. References should state the author, publisher, publishing date and access date if known.
 * The Adjacent counties, Historic trails and Recreational trails sections should be merged with other sections; they are currently too short to deserve they're own sections, and no sections should contain only a list.
 * Please provide citations for these statements:
 * "On November 22, 1858, General William Larimer, a land speculator from eastern Kansas, placed cottonwood logs to stake a claim on the hill overlooking the confluence of the South Platte River and Cherry Creek, across the creek from the existing mining settlement of Auraria. Larimer named the town site Denver City to curry favor with Kansas Territorial Governor James W. Denver."
 * "Beat poet Allen Ginsberg lived for a time in a basement apartment on Grant Street (no longer standing), and Kerouac briefly owned a home in the Denver suburb of Lakewood in the late spring and summer of 1949. In addition, Ginsberg helped found the "Jack Kerouac School of Disembodied Poetics at Naropa," in nearby Boulder at the Buddhist college Naropa University, then Naropa Institute."
 * "Denver has acquired, built and maintained around 40,000 acres (160 km²) of mountain parks"
 * "the most famous being Red Rocks Park, which is known just as much for its scenery as its musical history revolving around the Red Rocks Amphitheatre."
 * "Democrats have long held a majority sway on Denver politics with most officials elected citywide having Democratic Party affiliation."
 * "In federal elections, Denverites also tend to vote for Democratic candidates, voting for the Democratic Presidential nominee in every election since 1960 (excluding 1980 and 1972). "
 * "Recently, the Denver area has started making a comeback, with the October 2005 unemployment at 4.7%"
 * "It covers more than 53 square miles (137 km²), making it the largest airport in the United States by land area."

I will check back in no less than seven days. If progress is being made and issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GA/R). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAC. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions. Regards, Epbr123 11:58, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I took care of the Airport citations and got rid of the historic trails, which is something I agree should go. However, I feel the adjacent municipality information should stay as it is more in line with general template information than a "list." I don't think there is anyway to have that information in a geographical way than with the way it is currently formatted, unless someone wants to make them a more advanced template. I think it is completely legitimate and in line with a good article. Vertigo700 05:26, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The Adjacent municipalities section is fine; the Adjacent counties section isn't. Epbr123 18:39, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Fixed adjacent counties --MattWright (talk) 19:46, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I added a few of the missing references and struck through the items above that I referenced. I also went through and cleaned up the references that were missing proper citation format, using cite web. --MattWright (talk) 15:25, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I'll pass the article, once fair use rationales are added to the images. Epbr123 09:43, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
 * The two images you cited were removed from the article shortly after you brought it up, and I don't think any of the other images are used under fair use, but rather have CC, GFDL or Public Domain licenses. Correct me if I'm wrong. --MattWright (talk) 18:02, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I hadn't realised the two images were removed. Pass!. Epbr123 18:08, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Sister city list
So somebody re-added the sister city list to the main page. Since we had discussed earlier on the need to not have lists on the Denver page, I am going to remove this (the Sister cities of Denver page remains in see also). Also, since we are on the topic of lists, I am also thinking of removing the list of higher education institutions from this page and adding a new page with the list to link to the education section of the main Denver page. Any thoughts? Vertigo700 06:19, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Adding coord. to Denver related articles
Hey all,

I just discovered the wonder that is Google Earth and want to encourage you all to start including GPS coordinates in any Denver/Colorado related articles you do. Periodically (about every month or so), Google looks up articles that have GPS coordinates and adds them to the Google Earth program so that users can click a little button and be whisked away to our articles if they want more information. It's a great way in my opinion to get some more readers to our lesser-seen articles.

To add GPS coordinates to an article simply put on any part of a page replacing the GPS coordinates with those of the place you are adding (N and W are the lattitude and longitude, which shouldn't change if you are just looking up stuff for Denver). To find those coordinates, simply download Google Earth and zoom to the location of the place and write down the numbers you see on the bottom left part of the screen which represent the longitude and lattitude of the place. The first number is the longitude north, and the second is the lattitude west. Just the first three numbers of each of those is fine for the purposes of adding GPS coordinates unless you need to get very, very specific. If we start adding now, we should get our articles listed all over the Denver Google Earth page, which is one of the most 3D imaged cities in the nation, due to Google's local offices in the city. Definitely great additions to the city map! Vertigo700 22:01, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Adding coordinates found by the method you suggest sounds an awful lot like original research. I don't dispute the utility of doing this, but finding another method (from something published) to obtain the coordinates would be a good idea. -- Rick Block (talk) 22:16, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I ran this past Village Pump and the consensus seems to be that using Google Earth is not considered original research because it's something produced by a third party that is also verifiable by anyone, pretty much in the same way that any other source is. They also pointed me to the USGS locations database [], which certainly works for some, though not all, of the articles I would like to find coordinates for. Vertigo700 05:57, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I certainly agree the USGS database is fine. Are you going to reference Google Earth in cases where you use it?  I missed the VP thread and might have had something to say about it, but I'm not overly concerned (although this does strike me as direct, first person observation - if we're doing this, why not just drive around in a GPS-enabled car and write down coordinates from it [please don't actually do this]?).  -- Rick Block (talk) 14:24, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't coordinates from a GPS system be something that is verifiable and can be looked up/confirmed by anyone else using a GPS system? And you could cite the GPS system that gave you the coordinates if needed. I don't know -- I've definitely pulled a lot of coordinates off of Google Earth in the past and didn't realize this might be a problem, except that you can come up with two coordinates that are both valid for basically any item depending on the accuracy you choose. --MattWright (talk) 16:58, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Culture and contemporary life
I deleted the following sentences from the "Culture and contemporary life" section since they strike me as promotional:
 * Denver continues to gain cultural importance. The city was selected as the future home for a museum dedicated to abstract expressionist painter Clyfford Still. The city is also home to a unique theatre company unlike any other in the world, the the Physically Handicapped Actors & Musical Artists League.

The entire section was then blanked as "promotional" with this edit. I've reverted the blanking, but I'm interested in other opinions about both the sentences I deleted and rest of this section. -- Rick Block (talk) 13:35, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

I've been asked why I removed the reference to the future home of the Clyfford Still museum. "Selected as the future home of" is a crystal ball sort of reference. I think adding this sort of statement is appropriate if the selection itself is notable (selected as the site of the 20xx Olympics, selected as the site of the 2008 Democratic National Convention), but in general until there's some tangible aspect of something ("is the site of the recently opened ... museum" or even "... museum is under construction") I don't think being selected as something warrants a reference. -- Rick Block (talk) 18:15, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I do think the future intangibility of the wording is problematic. However, I think the Clyfford Still museum does warrant inclusion in the article, because it is something that happened rather than something completely speculative. (I would not think...Denver is on the shortlist for a Cylfford Still museum...or something similar to be appropriate). The claim also needs a citation. Perhaps we can simply rephrase: The city acquired the estate of abstract expressionist painter Clyfford Still in 2004 and plans to build a museum to exhibit his works near the Denver Art Museum by 2010.

Vertigo700 04:30, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

List of foreign consulates in Denver
A mass deletion is going on against List of foreign consulates in Denver, please go to Articles for deletion/List of foreign consulates in Oklahoma City and vote. Chris 05:55, 29 October 2007 (UTC)