Talk:Houston/Archive 9

Ellington Field Renamed
worked a little on article, link from main houston page needs to be redone. sorry its so sloppy but the kiddo is crying and need to run! cheers Urban909 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.31.224.8 (talk) 02:06, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Moved from article
''I moved this from the article because it was unsourced, was too long and didn't fit in the article very well. Also needs a good copyedit. Thanks, Postoak (talk) 19:11, 22 January 2008 (UTC)''

realllllllyyyy!! were forced to open all freeway lanes outbound after Texas Governor Rick Perry was awaken at 3 a.m. as local officials called him for help. Gridlock roads in all directions out of Houston had even country dirt roads filled as the people fled. Many surrended and returned home, but 2.5 million pushed on fearing the repeat of New Orlean's devastation. Many stuck in gridlock would runout of Gas. The State stepped up at the time running fuel trucks and police cars to give out 5 gallons free per car out of gas. The storm would turn in it's final hours before landfall leaving little damage to the Houston area, but devastating the Beaumont and Louisiana border area. Sadly more people died in the evacuation of Houston then from the storm after several died of heat stroke and a deadly bus fire filled with nursing home patients whose oxygen tanks helped fuel the fire. The return trip was made easier by government asking those returning to return over several days stagard by dividing the area into sections. With 2.5 million leaving as they all filled thier gas tanks they left the Oil Capital of the world with little to no gasoline left. The return required fuel trucks sent from around the state to refill gas stations in the Houston Area, but also along the Interstates and Highways leading back to Houston. The Leasons learned lead to removalable barriers to open all freeway lanes for future evacuation and the stagging of fuel along evacuation routes including tankers at rest areas and mandating higher amount of fuel stored at gas stations in the days before a storm is predicted to hit.

Images
I swapped the placement of the first two images back to their original placement when the article became a FA. The text appears (to me) to flow around the images a little better this way. Postoak (talk) 23:27, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Celebities sec
Not only is this newly added section trivia and formated as a list (both of which are discouraged), the list is significantly incomplete. It will be a magnet for additions and, most likely, prove to be unmanageable. I suggest removing it. Perhaps a seperate list/article would be possible. --Evb-wiki (talk) 14:53, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Agreed, I noticed that it's already covered by adding the celebritie's articles to Category:People_from_Houston,_Texas --Enric Naval (talk) 15:07, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Airport information in the infobox
This information is not found in the inforbox on any major city articles. NYC, LA and Chicago have multiple aiports but they are not listed in the infobox. It is nonstandard. Primary and Secondary based on what criteria? Popularity? Passengers? What about EFD? It was recently added to Dallas by the same editor who keeps adding it here. I don't feel it belongs. Also, why just airports? Why not also list the primary port of Houston, the train stations and the bus stations in the infobox? Because it is irrelevant information in the infobox. Postoak (talk) 03:59, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Infobox image
The image of the city in the infobox was changed because the editor felt it was "more appropriate". However, several of the buildings are obscured by trees. I reverted to the previous image because the older image provided a better view of the skyline /buildings. Thanks, Postoak (talk) 20:14, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I second thatSgvalenti (talk) 15:09, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Seven Meadows
An IP user in AFC has suggested an article on Seven Meadows, which is considered a suburb of Houston. I don't know if Seven Meadows is already mentioned here or not, but I still am not sure whether it really merits an individual page or not. Could someone please look at it here, and give their opinion? Thanks! The &#39;&#39;Gorgeous Girl&#39;&#39;!!! (talk) 03:55, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks like it was already speedy deleted. Postoak (talk) 04:06, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, that was a link to AFC, and I guess I got the name wrong. I don't think the article itself has ever existed. The &#39;&#39;Gorgeous Girl&#39;&#39;!!! (talk) 04:20, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Montage
A montage photo was added to the infobox recently. I pulled it because the images are not up to par, especially if you compare to the montage photos at NYC, Chicago, etc. The TMC (gathering storm clouds?) and Astrodome (big pole up the middle, half of image is concrete) images aren't that great..let's try for some top notch photos and try it again. We've got some great photographers here, hopefully they can help. Thanks, 05:33, 4 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I am the creator of the montage photo's for Los Angeles, Las Vegas< Nevada, Auckland and San Francisco and I would be happy to create one for the Houston article (if there are no objections).  Taifar  ious1   05:22, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
 * No objections whatsoever! I was admiring your work at the other city articles. Thank you! Postoak (talk) 05:44, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Possible images to include:
 * 1) Statue of Sam Houston in Hermann Park - here's one but it should be close up and centered. [[Image:Hermannpark2.JPG|right|thumb]]
 * 2) A ship docked at the Houston Ship Channel
 * 3) a better picture of the Astrodome
 * 4) the San Jacinto Monument
 * 5) downtown
 * 6) Texas Medical Center.


 * Then I shall get started ASAP, but its almost 7pm here and i'm hungry and the Simpson's starts soon :)  Taifar  ious1   06:57, 7 September 2008 (UTC)


 * lol but don't forget to add a pic of uptown houston to the montage...it's one of the most important parts of houston —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.245.3.130 (talk) 07:47, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Climate and hurricanes
Given the huge amount of damage from hurricanes Ike, Rita and Alicia, it seems something about hurricanes should be added to the climate section. Houston's location on the Gulf Coast means this severe weather will always be a factor in city history and development.--Parkwells (talk) 15:51, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Is anyone going to mention Hurricane Ike in the History section of the article? I have been waiting! &mdash;RJN (talk) 19:38, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Be bold and dig in! :) –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  22:03, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Prevailing Wind Pattern
It looks like many websites disagree with wikipedia about the prevailing wind being from the southwest (many say southeast), where is the citation for this? Osndok (talk) 20:11, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Where is a source that indicates southeast? Postoak (talk) 20:14, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Requested move
There is currently a proposal on the table to amend the Wikipedia naming conventions for US cities to follow the AP Stylebook's suggested names. This would effectively move a number of US city articles currently on the list, so Houston, Texas would be moved to Houston. To comment on this discussion, please go here. Dr. Cash (talk) 16:51, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Port of Houston
Sorry guys, Im new and could not figure out how to open a first talk post in the "Port of Houston" page, but the Google Earth Wikipedia Placemark for the port of Houston is in Barbour's cut, a very small 2 ship loading area. The actual Port of Houston is further North and West. Im hoping soemone can move it because this will certainly confuse school age kids studying this port. Urbanz (talk) 16:39, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Map?
Featured, with no map showing its location within its county or Texas in general? For shame! Would someone be so kind as to provide a map? The Jade Knight (talk) 13:09, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * The map was replaced. Postoak (talk) 07:04, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

History begins... when?
As a regular cities editor, I noticed that your article literally begins its historical context at its founders whereas most other city articles will indeed start with Native Americans or some previous inhabitant that was moved and as well mention a trace of what the city was before it was colonized. While I don't see it as a pre-requisite for a History section to meet WP Cities, any mention of history before the founders is strikingly absent in the associated History of Houston page. Could some of you editors explain this absence, was there really nothing and nobody in the area before Western settlement? Certainly a mention of Spain's dominance? I find this hard to believe. On a side note, the associated history and timeline pages need cleaning up. I think NOT NEWS would apply to various historically insignificant murders which have nothing to do with THE CITY's history. davumaya 06:05, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't believe the location of Houston was a settlement of any kind, Native, Spanish, Mexican, or otherwise, before its founding on Buffalo Bayou by the Allen brothers. It was never a French or Spanish colony or Mexican town. The Karankawas were the closest Native Americans associated with the area, but they disappeared, mainly at the hands of Spanish and French, during the 18th century, and were located mainly on Galveston and other areas on the coast. The Galveston page does mention the Karankawa and Akokisa tribes. France, Spain and Mexico certainly controlled the Texas region at various times, but had no settlements in or near the swamp that is present-day Houston. The Spanish founded San Antonio, for instance, but not Houston. Mexico established no settlement at the site of Houston. Houston was founded at the time of Texas independence from Mexico because its location on Buffalo Bayou made it a convenient port for the relatively new cotton trade in Texas. Independence from Mexico made slavery legal in Texas, increasing perceived opportunities in the local cotton industry. Two New York real estate entrepreneurs saw their opportunity. So, yes, the Allen Brothers were the Romulus and Remus of Houston.Stevewunder (talk) 02:35, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Having looked at some other city pages, I do see what you mean, but I think anything historical about the Houston area before 1836 falls more generally on the History of Texas page, as the specific area prior to that time was just a swamp. A lot went on in the region of Texas, of course: various Native American tribes, France, Spain, Mexico... but it seems a choice between too much information or none. Since nothing here would be distinctive from the History of Texas page, it seems better to go with none. Stevewunder (talk) 09:07, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Sister Cities
The article makes no mention of sister or twin cities TexinNPhilly 01:35, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * The link to the article was replaced..see the Culture section. Postoak (talk) 07:05, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

content fork?
There is lots of overlap with the Greater Houston article. Some may consider it a content fork. Content forks are not permitted. I'm not too concerned about it for now. Chergles (talk) 19:42, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Holland Lodge Removed from article
The statement below was removed from the history section because it is not a key historical event for the city. It might be more appropriate for the Sam Houston article or for "Holland House" if one exists, but not the lead of the history section where the founding of the city should be the lead sentence.

"In 1835, one year before the initial founding of the city of Houston and one year before being elected first President of the Republic of Texas, Sam Houston founded the Holland Masonic Lodge in where now lies Houston, TX.(( http://www.hollandlodge.org/hlfamous.htm ))"

- Postoak (talk) 16:12, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Also, the webpage provided does not support the claim made. While it indicates that the lodge was founded in 1835, there is no claim or indication that the original location of the lodge was at the same place it is now, or that it was at the location Houston is now, before Houston was established by the Allen brothers. --Evb-wiki (talk) 16:39, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

________________

The Lodge was in fact founded in 1835 not 1935, and it is very relevant to the history of Houston, TX and the Republic of Texas. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ultra Enos (talk • contribs) 20:24, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * That was a typo (which I now have fixed). The webpage indicates the founding was 1835, but doesn't indicate it was in the place that became Houston. See link to the Historical Association article provided by Postoak below. --Evb-wiki (talk) 20:29, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

We must recognize the actual history and involvement of Sam Houston in the City of Houston.

In 1835, one year before the initial founding of the city of Houston and one year before being elected first President of the Republic of Texas, Sam Houston founded the Holland Masonic Lodge in where now lies Houston, TX. http://www.hollandlodge.org/hlfamous.htm

I have posted this bit of history on the Houston, TX wiki page, and it has been removed 3 times today. Either someone disagrees with the historical facts, or they are opposed to the public knowledge of it. Either way, please explain yourself, or I will continue to re-post as frequently as needed. Let's save both of us the headache and time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ultra Enos (talk • contribs) 20:19, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * According to the Texas Historical Association, the Holland Lodge was established in Brazoria, Texas in 1835. After a difficult period, it was then moved to Houston and chartered in October 1837. The statement above is incorrect. Thanks, Postoak (talk) 20:23, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Additional source indicates the lodge was not established in Houston in 1835, but in 1837. . Postoak (talk) 20:43, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

--- Updated post:

In 1835, one year before the initial founding of the city of Houston and one year before being elected first President of the Republic of Texas, Sam Houston founded the Holland Masonic Lodge. The intial founding of the lodge took place in Brazoria and was quickly relocated to what is now Houston, TX in 1837. http://www.hollandlodge.org/hlfamous.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ultra Enos (talk • contribs) 20:47, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I removed it, because the statement does not indicate why the fact is significant to the history of Houston. Based on that, the mention carries undue weight in this article. BTW, I left mention of the lodge in the Sam Houston article because it is something Sam Houston did, which is more relevant to that article. --Evb-wiki (talk) 20:54, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Agree with Evb-wiki...this belongs in the Sam Houston article, a Freemasonry article, or perhaps "History of Masonic lodges in Texas" where it is more relevant. Thanks, Postoak (talk) 21:04, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

I disagree, but will comply. Thank you for leaving the post within the Sam Houston page. The foundation of such intstitutions played a historic role in those days, and the timing and location in which the Holland Lodge was founded profoundly affected the foundation of leadership and culture in Houston, TX. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ultra Enos (talk • contribs) 21:12, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Hopefully, the item at Sam Houston us sourced. As you mention, such "secret society" institutions were very popular (and there were many), and important to various parts of society in many areas. But to be relevant to a city? I think that would be hard to show. sinneed (talk) 21:16, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

It is sourced, and is hardly a "secret society" conspiracy. The lodge and its foundation is an important stone in the creation of the government and culture in Texas and in Houston, and the facts surrounding the dates, places and persons of this institution warrants historical notice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ultra Enos (talk • contribs) 21:25, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

snow
you might want to update the "most recent snowfall" bit to today. WDIV is reporting that houston got 3 inches' worth, though it all melted due to the warm soil (it was 77F the day before). RingtailedFox • Talk • Contribs 04:30, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Port of Houston
I've put the information about the Port back in, as there was no reason given to delete it, and it seems significant to me, at least for a link to the main page there. Swanny18 (talk) 12:48, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Please add sources. Postoak (talk) 13:32, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The source is the Port of Houston page; I took some text from there to make a summary for here. Is the information wrong? Swanny18 (talk) 17:48, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Nicknames
I am sure a discussion about this has taken place before, but I'd suggest adding "Bayou City" as a nickname. I lived for Houston for many years, and I recall hearing this often. Just a suggestion! -Whataworld06 (talk) 21:25, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Definitely, "Bayou City" should be added! I went to an annual festival here in Houston -- the Bayou City Art Festival -- referencing this name. See www.bayoucityartfestival.com for more info. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sbonsib (talk • contribs) 23:59, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Also: clutch city, h-town. 76.166.207.84 (talk) 08:07, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Whoever keeps deleting "h-town" when I add it, I'd appreciate it if you could just leave it. Everyone who lives in Houston calls it h-town. There's no reason to delete it. I hear H-town 9 times out of 10 when people use nicknames. I almost never hear anyone call it space city. Let's be honest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BrandonG216 (talk • contribs) 20:31, September 24, 2009


 * Space City is the official nickname. It was agreed a while back to only keep the official nickname in the infobox because of the repeated entry of unofficial nicknames. The culture section of the article lists additional nicknames as well as the article Nicknames of Houston. Why should H-Town be listed over the other nicknames? And no, everyone that lives in Houston does not call it h-town. Thanks, Postoak (talk) 03:00, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Please see the nicknames discussion and consensus in the talk archive if you have questions concerning why or where the nicknames appear in the article. Thank you, Postoak (talk) 03:05, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Location from Houston
This section removed, no need for it. No other city FA's have this. Postoak (talk) 21:45, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

texes is afun palces —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.14.131.46 (talk) 18:18, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

City classification
The "top" classification is only for country capitals. Wallie (talk) 17:27, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Pronunciation
I removed the supposed local pronunciation "/juːstən/." I live in Houston. Nobody who lives here says it like that. We laugh at people who do.--LoveCowboy2024 (talk) 17:31, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Reverted. This second pronunciation is used, if not by the majority. Specifically I hear it often from long time residents of the Humble area; perhaps because the H in Humble isn't pronounced. My yankee friends mock my use of "y'all", but it's still acceptable here in "Yew-Ston" --Long, Tall Texan (talk) 22:47, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Lived in Houston for 20 years. Never heard that pronunciation. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 22:58, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm a native and rarely hear it pronounced this way. I'm removing it from the lead because it isn't a common pronunciation. Postoak (talk) 23:51, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The only place I've heard it pronounced Yewstun was in Pennsylvania. Nobody in Houston says it that way. --YixilTesiphon TalkContribs 19:43, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree. I live here and have never heard it pronounced that way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rlbarton (talk • contribs) 20:24, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's very rare that I here this pronunciation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sbonsib (talk • contribs) 00:01, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Images, June 30
Many new images were added to the article recently that did not have copyright notes and were scheduled for deletion on June 30, 2009. A quick check on a few images revealed some concerns: copyvio and previous licensed image was illegally classified as public domain:



Previous images were restored to prevent copyright violations on any article images - required to keep this article as featured content. Postoak (talk) 13:26, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


 * While I cannot be certain, several of the photos in question looked vaguely familiar as having been used in Greater Houston Convention and Visitor Bureau publications. It is possible that I could be mistaken, but always best to be on the safe side. --Nsaum75 (talk) 04:09, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Heritage Plaza
Hi, I noticed that we have no pictures of just the "Heritage Plaza" on the article. I took a couple photos of it a few months back and decided to upload them to Wikipedia. I was hoping that "one" of the pictures, which ever is deemed the suitable for the article, would be included under the "architecture" section. I just checked and we do have a Heritage Plaza article, and a good quality image also, but I personally would just like a reference to the building and the style of architecture that influenced added to the page as it's a real focal point to the Houston skyline.

First three photos are mine, the last one is from the Heritage Plaza article. Taruru (talk) 03:03, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Fattest city addition
I don't think the fattest city statement in the culture section really belongs. This comes from an men's exercise magazine and is unscientific. The only way you can prove the city is the fattest is to line everyone up in the city and use a fat caliper on everyone. Postoak (talk) 23:43, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not married to it, I just put it back since it had been eliminated in MBK's reverts of weird vandalism. --YixilTesiphon TalkContribs 22:32, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
 * If this was coming from the CDC or NIH then I would be more inclined to include it. This annual unscientific "survey" is just an attempt to sell magazines. I'm removing the statement. Thanks, Postoak (talk) 16:36, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I am reinserting the "fattest city statement" into this article. I really think it warrants inclusion (I originally came to this article hoping to find more information about Houston's well-known status as a "fat" city, and, finding none, decided to add this relevant information myself), and your reasons for removing it are flawed in opinion.


 * 1. You say: "I don't think the fattest city statement in the culture section really belongs." Interesting comment, considering there was no fattest city statement in the culture section. If you notice, the statement was in the demographics section, since it was describing a very relevant population characteristic.


 * 2. You say: "This annual unscientific 'survey' is just an attempt to sell magazines." First of all, the original language in the article correctly identified the work as a study, not a survey (which is a more specific kind of study), so you are again making false claims about the nature of the "fattest city statement" you so hastily removed. Second of all, the study warrants inclusion in the article regardless of whether it was conducted scientifically. An example: When awards shows or committees (or magazines) make a proclamation about who is a Teen Choice or who deserves a Nobel prize, are they using scientific methods to come to some ironclad conclusion about these issues? No, they are using their own methodology to provide their opinions about who deserves what; since these awards are culturally relevant in America, they are worthy of mention in Wikipedia articles. Houston was given this "award" by Men's Health after information from the CDC, EPA, Nielsen Media Research, etc was run through whatever formula the magazine uses to determine the winner. The magazine is not claiming that Houston residents have the highest average BMI, body fat percentage, or even weight; it is not making any scientific claims. The magazine is just announcing that Houston has the worst combination of several factors deemed by them to be indicative of "fatness."


 * The Men's Health fitness study (I will continue to use the word "study" because the denotation of the word does not imply scientific execution) is, as I pointed out in the original language of my edit, a prominent and culturally relevant metric for the "fitness" of a city, and is reported on every year by USA Today, CNN, etc (I will provide even MORE citation for this, if need be). Regardless of your opinions about the study (or its results?), it is undoubtedly a relevant addition to the article. Please do not remove the information again without providing a sensible explanation. Thanks, dog! -Dunne409 (talk) 19:58, 7 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Culture vs. demographics section - my error, sorry. You mention "Men's Health" repeatedly above, but I assume you mean "Men's Fitness". I understand your point, but I feel that this survey really doesn't belong in the article. Nevertheless, since it gets so much attention each year I suppose it should stay, unless other editors respond and the consensus is to remove it. I'm surprised that you didn't update the other city articles with this survey; Houston isn't the only city that has been in the top 10 numerous times. I did update the statement to mention that it is an unscientific survey and provided references, one coming from Men's Fitness where it clearly states that it is a survey. I can find more if needed. Thanks, Postoak (talk) 21:59, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Merge proposal: "Galveston Bay Area" and "Greater Houston"
Some editors have proposed merging the Galveston Bay Area article with the Greater Houston article. If you with to share your thoughts please comment there.

--Mcorazao (talk) 19:22, 3 September 2009 (UTC)