Talk:Taylor Yard

Meaning of "post-industrial site"?
I was reverted here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Taylor_Yard,_Los_Angeles&diff=next&oldid=840894281. I don't think this phrase should be in the lead because it has no meaning for most people. Also I have never seen this phrase used in any source, so maybe it shouldn't be in the article at all. WP:BRD. Sincerely, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 20:30, 23 May 2018 (UTC)


 * w/r/t: Meaning of "post-industrial site"?


 * Thank you for bringing this perspective.


 * The terminology in question, "post-industrial", is commonly used in relation to Taylor Yard by reliable sources, including the EPA and California State Parks. I've included two such examples below which, as you've dutifully noted, were not cited on Wiki page. As such, if these correct citations are made, I believe it is justifiable to include the term "post-industrial" in the lead.


 * 01. EPA—
 * The Environmental Protection Agency uses term post-industrial in relation to Taylor Yard in a document titled "LOS ANGELES RIVER REVITALIZATION & THE URBAN WATERS FEDERAL PARTNERSHIP." The exact phrase is" Bringing Nature Back to the Post-Industrial Landscape" (p12, 13) The source is located here: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-02/documents/armstrong-urban-waters.pdf


 * 02. CA STATE PARKS—
 * The California State Parks Foundation uses the term post-industrial in relation to Taylor yard in a blog post titled "The Bowtie Parcel Offers Inspiring Community Space in Los Angeles." The exact phrase is, "Known as the Bowtie Parcel, these 18 acres of post-industrial land reside within the former Taylor Yard, a Southern Pacific Railroad service facility." The source is located here: https://calparks.wordpress.com/2016/05/23/the-bowtie-parcel-offers-inspiring-community-space-in-los-angeles/


 * Sincerely,
 * HouseRound (talk) 18:30, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I can't agree that the term has entered general usage enough in connection with Taylor Yard so that Wikipedia can use it in the lead of the article. Later on, yes, with a citation, but not in the lead. See Identifying_reliable_sources. Can we agree on that? See WP:Consensus. Otherwise we are allowing a non-neutral source to influence our phraseology.  Yours, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 19:07, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Disagree. I have no problem with the term post-industrial as both an accurate descriptor and (after doing a simple google search of the term) a commonly used phrase. Phatblackmama (talk) 21:52, 27 May 2018 (UTC)