Talk:Piedmont Park

Merge from Friends of Piedmont Park
Please merge any relevant content from [ Friends of Piedmont Park] per Articles for deletion/Friends of Piedmont Park. Thanks. —Quarl (talk) 2007-01-02 08:41Z 

Parking Deck Controversy
Just tried to edit out a good bit of info about the controversy. There were way too many non-notable details. Just the main points of the current situation need to be in the article itself. Also, please cite sources - the entire article needs them, but cite source that people can then go read if they want all the suit details. If you want to write in that level of detail, the perfect place is as a news article on Portal:Georgia (U.S. state) - it needs content. Please discuss here on the talk page rather than waging an edit war. Thanks. --Roswell native 04:48, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Added back in were just the details of the lawsuit, which is the current focus of the controversy. That lawsuit includes subjects of local, state-wide, and national interest, including open government, the proper boundaries of public-private partnerships, and the limits on using public resources for non-public purposes. Other information was not included, and the new article gives readers only the main information about the current situation. The new paragraph also includes the only website I know of that contains a copy of the lawsuit. Thanks for the suggestions and the article is now better as a result of your inputs. Atlanta resident. February 18, 2007.-- —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.211.57.6 (talk • contribs).
 * Thanks for discussing here. The degree of detail in the text is really not of statewide of national interest (in fact, I'm local - I think my family membership to the Botanical Gardens is even stil valid - and I don't really care about the name of the judge or all the allegations of the suit). Basic summaries of the current events are all that should really be in an encyclopedic entry for Piedmeont Park - especially given that the rest of the article is so sparse. Not sure the suit details would stand alone as its own article either so that doesn't seem to be an option either. I still think writing a "news" article for Portal:Georgia (U.S. state) would be a more appropriate place for the blow-by-blow details of the actual lawsuit. I'd be interested in hearing others thoughts on this.
 * Also, the text itself also strikes me as being very POVish. Per What Wikipedia is not, Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought and Wikipedia is not a soapbox. Anything added needs to fit into those Wikipedia policies.  Speaking of which, I'll now get off my soapbox. Thank you again for discussing this on the talk page. --Roswell native 03:29, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

The legal battle regarding the Park is over. Any continuing litigation is taking place between the FoPP and the ABG and thus does not belong in this article. The focus of this section should now move to the progress of the north woods expansion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.20.224.159 (talk) 20:12, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your opinion, but the controversial actions of PPC are still relevant and a parking deck in the middle of a park will still be seen as incongruous and controversial. AU Tiger » talk 21:01, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It is not so much an opinion as it is being pragmatic. At what milestone would you propose the parking deck controversy become "old news"?

Bias introduced by parking deck opponents
Please don't omit the "pedia" from this wikipedia article. As Roswell native commented above, this article is not a soapbox! Edits done by 207.144.135.26 have been very aggressive towards the Piedmont Park Conservancy. Those feelings may be warranted but this is not the place. When in doubt, leave it out! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.215.154.55 (talk) 19:04, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Potential error in lead?
A sentence in the lead states that Atlanta's first professional baseball team, the Atlanta Crackers, played in the park from 1902-1902. I doubt it was only for 1902. Can someone please check? Majoreditor (talk) 00:06, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I think I found the correct answer. It should ready 1902 to 1904 instead of 1902-1902. Majoreditor (talk) 00:08, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

1895 Cotton States Expo was not "The World's Fair"
The 1895 Expo was *a* world's fair but not "THE 1895 World's Fair". Reliable sources of today do not call it that - they call it by its full name or the Cotton States Expo. 1895 newspapers called it "the Atlanta Exposition" and when they spoke of the World's Fair they meant the 1893 Chicago World's Fair.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Piedmont Park. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070928120005/http://www.hiwassee.us/midtown/content/HistNarrPiedmontPark1.shtml to http://www.hiwassee.us/midtown/content/HistNarrPiedmontPark1.shtml
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080513140546/http://www.wrbl.com/index.php/news/article/piedmont-park-drought-changes-major-events/5029/ to http://www.wrbl.com/index.php/news/article/piedmont-park-drought-changes-major-events/5029/

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

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 17:15, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 one external links on Piedmont Park. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presidents/gc2224.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.atlantaga.gov/government/urbandesign_piedmontapts.aspx
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.piedmontpark.org/history/history.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070616083821/http://www.city-book.com:80/Overview/history/history4.htm to http://www.city-book.com/Overview/history/history4.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.piedmontpark.org/restoration/NW_reclamation.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/atlanta/stories/2007/04/13/0414metpiedmont.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://aprr.org/groupskates/
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.piedmontpark.org/facilities/visitor_center.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:28, 9 November 2016 (UTC)