Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Tulsa, Oklahoma


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted 00:11, 12 May 2007.

Tulsa, Oklahoma
Self nomination. This article has undergone radical improvement over the last few months, and editors have worked to fit it to all the Featured Article criteria, along with quality standards set by current featured city articles. Tulsa is an important American city and of top importance in Wikiproject Oklahoma, and due special attention has dramatically improved the article's factual viability, prose, and comprehensiveness. Therefore, it is being nominated for FA status. Okiefromokla 21:41, 30 April 2007 (UTC) *That's all I found right now. Fix these and I'll give it another read through.--Jayron32| talk | contribs 01:28, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Fixes needed:
 * Middle paragraph of "Law and Government" needs serious copyedit.
 * Multiple capitalization errors.
 * First sentance needs works. Mayor isn't appointed, which implies that a superior picks the person to fill the position.  The mayor is elected.  The whole paragraph could use a copyedit for clarity.
 * Caption in Green Country map has a typo: It reads "Green County".
 * Sentance in history section has spelling errors and needs copyedit for a more encyclopedic tone: Econoimic prosperity took a break in 1982, when a national recession greatly effected the oil industry in Tulsa.
 * Image issues:
 * The 1921 Riot picture has a liscencing tag that is only valid in the U.S. Wikipedia is a multinational effort, and as such it probably needs a more inclusive licencing tag.  I am not sure this tag is even used anymore.  There is another licencing tag that is more universal, for images whose creator or author has been dead for more than 70 years.  It may apply here.  Also, the source of the image isn't specified.
 * I am still uneasy about the BOK image liscencing tag. I read the talk page, and it still feels a bit sketchy. **** I agree, and I'm the uploader. I've learned a lot since then. I see if I can get another email from the city that specifically releases it under a public license as opposed to just saying that it can be used.↔NMajdan &bull;talk  02:23, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the input. I fixed all the problems you listed except the race riot and BOK picture licences, and I will try to look into those shortly, or at least track down the licencing issue of the Race Riot picture (or just get another picture).Okiefromokla 02:01, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Hey, looking much better. On a second readthrough, I caught a few more issues:
 * "sleepy little town" in the history section. Ugh. Say "small town"
 * Same paragraph, a bit higher up: "...which led to the present day usage of the name Tulsa." Unneccessarily obfuscatory.  Try "which later changed to Tulsa."  Same idea, less words, easier to read.
 * Same paragraph, next sentance after that one: "However" implies a difference from prior sentance, but BOTH sentances deal with the same issue, oil discovery...
 * Same paragraph: Overuse of the word "boom" ... Oil boom, building boom. Try Mr. Roget...
 * Next paragraph: Two sentances start with "Known as...". Try a little variety here as well.  Also, it should be noted that MANY cities, not only Tulsa, had a "Black Wall Street".  Durham, NC had one as well.  Probably doesn't need mentioning here, but a DAB is probably needed to explain the difference.  Plus, there appears to be a double redirect here too...
 * Next paragraph: Overuse of "During..." Again, variety... ::: Sorry to dig up a whole new batch of stuff.  I hate to sound all nit-picky here, but "brilliant prose" is the standard we are aiming for.  When the above and the images issues are fixed, you can expect my support. --Jayron32| talk | contribs  02:26, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Alright, I fixed the problems you mentioned, including the picture issues (both mentioned pictures are now gone). Again, the input is appreciated. Okiefromokla 22:15, 2 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment- Oklahoma is celebrating its centennial on 2007-11-16 and it would be great to have an Oklahoma-related article, such as this, on the Main Page on that day.↔NMajdan &bull;talk 02:23, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Lovely, then there's still a bit of time to get something featured. -- Phoenix  (talk) 02:29, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Support All fixes are done, I have no more reservations. Great job!--Jayron32| talk | contribs  00:24, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Support, looks fine. -- Phoenix  (talk) 20:21, 3 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Object. Lots of polish needed; has this article been to peer review?  Please read WP:MSH and fix throughout.  Also, please read WP:LEAD; the lead is not at all a compelling summary of the article.  Please read WP:MOSNUM; full dates should be wikilinked.  Prose:  the "city" witnessed murders ?  See WP:LAYOUT for correct placement of templates at top of section headings.  Footnotes are cluttered with the (web) parameter, which is the default and should be left out.  Why is a visittulsa source identified as CNN Money ?  Publications dates (example, ) should be given when available on sources (author as well, if one is available).  Why are the Work and Publisher parameters repeated in the cite templates?  The correct parameter for most of these instances is Publisher; no need to repeat. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 03:41, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
 * No. I just went through and made a large number of sample edits to show you the work still needed; please review the sample edits to understand the work needed throughout. My edits are samples only.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 12:15, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Please also see my edit. The pages parameter should not be used for web refs with a single page. It is intended for citing specific pages of a multiple-page work. The date field of web refs should not be guessed at. If there is no indication of the date on the page, do not put the current year in the field (which seems to be what was done in the section I edited). Cite sources directly. You cited a web page with an article that was clearly labeled as a copy from the Tulsa World. It was a simple matter to go to the paper's web site, find the article in the archives, and reference that instead. I'm also concerned that this article may have too great a reliance on primary sources. I haven't done a thorough check, but the section I edited definitely needs more secondary sources.
 * I'd love to see this article reach featured status. I'm willing to help you out with the ref work and formatting if you can tackle the bulk of it. Feel free to ask if you have any questions.  Pagra shtak  15:01, 4 May 2007 (UTC)


 * You should also go through and make sure stats are dated so that future editors will know what needs to be updated; example &mdash; things like population and ... is ranked among the best 123 Western Colleges by the Princeton Review, ... Pls ping me when you're ready for another look.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 15:41, 4 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Also, solo years should not be wikilinked (see WP:CONTEXT and WP:MOSNUM). And, Pagrashtak left a reply to your query on my talk page about the problem with primary sources, that should be reviewed throughout.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 05:28, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Update: All these problems are being worked on and will probably be close to done very very soon.Okiefromokla•talk 23:12, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Dsmdgold's Comments

 * Comments What has been done so far is very good but a few places need some work. Note, I am a native Tulsan and many of my comments are based on my sometimes faulty memory.
 * The American's prominence seems to be excessive, given that a ground breaking has yet to be announced and the thing may ever be built. It is mentioned in the lead and at least twice in the article.
 * The Race Riot needs to be mentioned in the lead. After the discovery of oil, it is the most important event in Tulsa history. fixed.
 * Although I have no sources at hand, it is my understanding that the reason Tulsa became the big city, rather than Glenpool or Sapulpa is that the citizens of Tulsa managed to construct a bridge over the Arkansas (it considered economically impossible given the sand bottom of the river), and that Tulsa banned drilling for oil within the city limits. Most of the oil fields were on the other side of the river, and Tulsa was more pleasant place to build homes for the oil barons.
 * The Race Riot needs a fuller discussion.
 * The, still unfinished BOK center has six mentions, more that any other structure in the article. This is excessive. Much toned down, thank you
 * It is my memory that the present form of government was adopted in part under the threat of lawsuit by Civil Right groups on the the theory that the previous City Commission diluted minority votes, since all seats were elected at large. not easily sourceable.
 * The Tulsa Flood plan was developed response to a specific flood in. I believe, 1984.
 * Mention should be made of some of the specific building of architectural significance. These might include, the Mayo Hotel, the Adams Hotel, the Ambassador Hotel, the Philtower, the Tulsa Fire Alarm Building, Holy Family Cathedral, Boston Avenue Methodist Church, Westhope (Frank Lloyd Wright house), the IPE building, and the "Jetson's" architecture of ORU. Done
 * The article states "The initiative (Vision 2025) has led to a significant economic development and investment surge" and points to a reference. That reference, although it does indicate that an investment surge is happening, does not seem to support the idea that the surge is tied to the initiative. Fixed
 * The number of High Schools in Tulsa Public Schools should be mentioned.
 * The Schusterman center offers undergraduate course work, and is not therefore a "graduate campus"
 * I think that Spartan School of Aeronautics deserves some mention.
 * Vocational education in general is not discussed.
 * Gilcrease Museum has, at its core, the collection of Thomas Gilcrease. He should be mentioned, like Waite Phillips is in conjunction with Philbrook.
 * The statement "Today, Tulsa contains several permanent dance, theater, and concert groups, including ballets, an orchestra, a chorus and opera company, and several large acting guilds." should be expanded upon, mentioning the specific groups. (The ballet and opera companies are mentioned in the lead, but not specifically discusses in the article.) Both orchestras should be mentioned. The major theater groups should be mentioned.
 * The various performance venues around town should be discussed. These include the PAC, the Brady, the Convention Center, the Fairgrounds Pavilion, the Mabee Center, the PACE, the Union PAC, the River Parks amphitheater, and some of the smaller venues.
 * Mohawk park contains the Oxley Nature Center.
 * I don't think that a not finished arena should lead off the sports section.
 * Is gambling a sport? Move the casinos to entertainment.
 * The box with th Tulsa minor league teams should be converted to text. Some historical perspective would be nice as in the past Tulsa has hosted pro Soccer and Basketball.
 * Mention should be made of the now defunct Tulsa Tribune
 * Did Garth Brooks start his career in Tulsa. He lives in the area now, but I thought he started performing in Stillwater. On a similiar note, although Brooks and Dunn's first video was filmed in Tulsa, I think they started their careers together elsewhere. I don't think that Carrie Underwood has ever lived in Tulsa. She of course got her start on American Idol.
 * Leon Russell and the GAP Band did start in Tulsa.
 * Paul Harvey started his radio career in Tulsa.
 * Shouldn't the refineries be mentioned in the economy section as well as the neighborhood section?
 * Shouldn't the infrastructure section discuss rail transport?
 * Tulsa's water supply should be discussed in the infrastructure and the history section.
 * In general, this article suffers from a "presentism" bias. For example almost half of the article's history section discussed events since the 1980's. A third of that discussion is on structures that have yet to be completed. Dsmdgold 16:57, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Two more thoughts. There should be a section on Religion in Tulsa (done) and a discussion of the health care infrastructure in Tulsa. Dsmdgold 18:03, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - OkiefromOkla has responded to these suggestions on Dsmdgold's talk page.↔NMajdan &bull;talk 18:54, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

OkiefromOkla's response from Dsmdgold's talk page:

Thanks for your input, but I have many reservations about your requests, and while some of them I agree with, such as religion, etc, I must disagree with most of them, since many of your requests are more suited for this article's daughter pages and there shouldnt be any need to make the article excessively long with every detail - it isn't a cityguide. Respectfully, I'll go point by point and say why: I will work on some of the things you have stated, such as healthcare, religion, and certain other things you've mentioned that I haven't included on my list of reservations. Pending further discussion, I do not think the article should be a cityguide, but rather an encycopedic article on Tulsa giving the "gist" of things with few examples.Okiefromokla•talk 19:06, 7 May 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.234.97.244 (talk) 18:03, 7 May 2007 (UTC). (sorry, I forgot to sign it and I wasn't logged in - the previous comment was by me, Okiefromokla•talk 18:06, 7 May 2007 (UTC))
 * The article is already pretty long - Most of your requests deal with adding very specific details. Since this article is an encylopedia overview, I don't think people want to read of every venue, person, or place in Tulsa, as this would be excessive. The article is meant to convey the "gist" of things, not a list of specific places or things. There should, however, be just a few examples to illustrate the "gist," but not a comprehensive listing of everything in Tulsa. Once again, it would be excessive.
 * The American's prominence is not overstated; if you take a look at the recent news coverage that is cited in the article, (dated in april 2007) the developer has recently announced that the project will break ground in 2007 and that it is definently going to be built.
 * Of the tulsa history sources cited, there is no mention of the reason Tulsa became a big city is because of the bridge, but in my opinion, we don't need to go that detailed in the history section (the history section is already the size of the other FA cities). However, it could be mentioned in the main Tulsa history article.
 * The Tulsa Race Riot has its own article which is linked to within the history section, so a more fuller discussion I do not think is required - the significance of the event is mentioned, again, I don't think the article need be overly long.
 * The BOK Center is mentioned in history to show the significance of Vision 2025; it's mentioned in architecture because it's intended to be a culmination of all architecture styles in tulsa (this is cited in the article); its mentioned in sports because its a huge development in Tulsa sporting capabilities, and will be the biggest sports venue; its mentioned in performing arts in that it will be the cities largest performing arts venue - I believe all these are neccissary and important in the article.
 * The information on the history of Tulsa's government is taken directly from the Tulsa City Council website as a source - I ave never heard about the civil rights lawsuit nor can I find it anywhere to use it as a source.
 * I don't think there is a reason to get specific with the actual flood that made the Tulsa city flood plan go into action - it isn't mentioned in any of the sources Ive seen, but I don't think its neccisary to get that specific, do you? You are talking about it being mentioned in climate - the section already says Tulsa was prone to flooding.
 * Art Deco architecture: Tulsa has one of the largest concentrations in the nation; if we started mentioning specific examples too much - well, there is a LOT. That sounds like it should be a daughter page called "Art Deco of Tulsa, Oklahoma". I can, however, mention a few that already have articles on wikipedia, like the philtower, etc.
 * The Schusterman center doesn't offer undergraduate course work.
 * The Spartan School of Aeronautics is mentioned. (look towards end of the education section).
 * Tulsa Tech is mentioned - it's a vocational school and the largest in the state. No FA City article goes very deep into the subject anyway, as it is an encyclopedia article and not a cityguide to mention every single vocational school in Tulsa would be way too excessive.
 * Gambiling is very arguably a sport, and it fits in the section with the sports betting at the race tracks. SInce there is no entertainment section and an entertainment section would overlap with other sections in culture, I think gambiling should stay in sports.
 * The sports box is a common thing, and is present in almost all city articles that are FA status - it violates no wikipedia standard.
 * Garth Brooks was born in Yukon but moved to Tulsa at a very young age and lived here most of his life. It is cited in the article (in the popular media section) that those musicians are from or got their start in Tulsa, and they were all taken directly from the source.
 * The History section's last two paragraphs are from 1982 and on and they both cover significant events - the oil bust was very important in Tulsa's history. In other words, it is not "almost half" of the history section - its about 2/10 of the history section - but remember, Tulsa was incorporated only 100 years ago - its a very young city and therfore the history is going to be less far back as most other cities.
 * PS: I agree with the religion, I will include religion information and healthcare and some of yoru requests - but for the most part, I frankly feel that your requests are unneccisary for the article's quality or to meet wikipedia standards. I don't mean to offend you or to discourage you from your suggestions,as they are welcome, but I would ask you to please look at Boston, Ann Arbor, Michigan, Lexington, Kentucky, San Jose, California, Houston, Texas, Seattle, and San Francisco, as these are all Featured city articles to make sure your requests meet with the content of these articles, as many of your requests for detail should be included in Tulsa's daughter articles, and maybe not the main article.Okiefromokla•talk 18:22, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

In response
 * We disagree on the amount of detail needed. I haven't requested a comprehensive listing of everything in Tulsa, just the highlights.
 * We may disagree, but I still think that a statue that hasn't been built and may never been built is not material for the article, much less the lead. Once construction is underway then, perhaps, it should be discussed. (I've read the source, I read the longer article in the World when it came out, and it basically says, No really, we are working on it. When the statue was first proposed it was supposed to finished by now.)
 * For a first shot at documenting the brige look here, here, here,and here. I found these through a google search (Tulsa History Bridge Oil). More definitive sources could be found. It is important to the history because without the bridge, there would have been no easy conection between Tulsa and the oil fields. (Even the Red Fork well was on the west side of Tulsa). Without a bridge, Tulsa would have been in the position of a modern town by-passed by the interstate.
 * I think all I was looking for on the Race Riot is mention of the sparking incident. Also nobody now believes the 39 killed number, mention should be made of the much larger estimates.
 * If the article is too long to mention more detail, due we need to be told that the BOK center will have 18000 seats 4 times? Seriously, it may be intended to be a "culmination of all architecture styles in Tulsa", but it isn't yet. Let's let the thing be built, and the report the critical opinion of it. Yes it will be a major venue, but it only needs to be discussed once.
 * I will conceed that the my major source for the City Government is my own faulty memory. However, I do remember reading editorials leading up to the vote that said we should do this before we forced to do it. Of course the current city government wouldn't mention something like this on the web. Short of going to the library and looking at twenty year old newspapers, this probably can't be sourced, so never mind.
 * The only reason to mention the specific flood is because it is true. Wihtout the city wide flood, the support would not have been there for the flood plan which includes (or did) a waste water management fee on every water bill.
 * I don't think that every Art Deco building should be mentioned, or every historic building. Just some of the highlights. An Art Deco of Tulsa, or Architecture of Tulsa would a great article though. Soem of the architecture I mentioned is not Art Deco.
 * Among other undergraduate degrees the Schusterman center offers a BSN. see here
 * Neither I, nor my browser search feature, can find mention of Spartan or Tulsa Tech in the current version of the article. Were they in an earlier version and got dropped by accident?
 * Gambling is not a sport, although horse racing is. My mistake on the entertainment section. I was thinking of the pop culture section, which would not be a good place for them. Perhaps the casinos should be in the economy section then.
 * The sports box doesn't violate a wikipedia standard, it just is ugly and confusing.
 * From Garth Brooks "Later that year, Brooks began his professional singing career, singing and playing guitar in Oklahoma clubs and bars, particularly the Tumbleweed in Stillwater. After a failed 1985 twenty-four hour trip to Nashville to gain a record contract, Brooks returned to Oklahoma and in 1986 married Sandy Mahl of Owasso, Oklahoma, whom he had met while working as a bouncer at the Tumbleweed. The following year, the couple moved to Nashville, and Brooks was able to begin making contacts in the music industry." No mention of Tulsa. The source for this is a page from the Tulsa City Library of musicians from Tulsa. He is from Tulsa, now, not when he started. (BTW this is 0-2 for cited sources actually backing up statements in the article. That is troubling.)
 * You are correct, the modern section is not half it is 329 words out of 1007, or 32%. I agree that the oil bust of the 80's was very important to Tulsa's history, and its coverage is apropriate. However there 221 words (about 20% of the history section) on recent (since 2003) events. This is disproportianate. I am aware that Tulsa has a short history. I mentioned above that the water sources should be mentioned in the history section. I would like to reiterate that again. Without the tapping of Spavina, Tulsa would not have had the growth it has had. It was a vitally important part of the history.
 * In addition to the Water supply, perhaps the other major utilities should be mentioned, as they are in the Ann Arbor article. I also note that the Lexington article doesn't have a sports box. Dsmdgold 23:31, 7 May 2007 (UTC


 * In Response:
 * As you say, I must still disagree about the statue. What the article says is correct based on the news articles cited: tulsa is the selected site for the largest freestanding statue in the world and that it is anticipated by developers to be a national icon. The developers hold strong to the fact that it will be built (as said in the sources) and that it is being developed to break ground this year. I think the largest statue in the world that would be bigger than the statue of liberty is important enough to be in the lead, since something so important would be what Tulsa will be known for, since a national icon will certainly be an icon for the city was well - and, I say again, it is still promised to be completed. Anyone who thinks that the world's largest statue - a national icon - isn't important enough to be mentioned in the lead of this article should think again. If you take a look in the history section, the previous finish date of 2007 and the delayed building is explained in accordance with the sources.
 * I am willing to compromise on the bridge issue - if we can both compromise on certain things, such as the sports box.
 * About the race riot - im sorry, you were just a little vauge about expanding it in your first suggestion. I'll put a mention of the triggering event and the estimations that more like 300 people died, no problem.
 * I can also include the "18,000 seat" information about the BOK Center in only one of the mentions. About the "culmination of all architecture styles in Tulsa" - that isn't made up, it's what the city told the developer to make it. Literally, it was designed to be an architectural icon; the developer built it with that purpose, it isn't simply an evaluation of the arena. I'll double check and make sure the source reflects that. I can also shorten its mention in some parts but I have to admit I don't quite understand your opposition to it being mentioned, at least not in performing arts and sports, as it is important to those sections. I'll go through and see if I can limit it, but it absolutely has to be in those two sections hands down, as the BOK Center makes Tulsa eligable for large scale concerts and large scale sporting events such as the Big 12 tournament and events Tulsa would not be eligable for otherwise. Its very important in those regards.
 * I still don't think we have to go into specific events about the flooding issue under the climate section - I do think this is sufficient to get the jist of it across: "Due to frequent flooding in past decades, Tulsa now has one of the most extensive flood control systems in the nation. In 2000, FEMA honored Tulsa as leading the nation in flood plain management." It wasn't one specific flood that would promp such an extensive system, but the source implies that it was because of frequent flooding.
 * I'll put ORU's architecture in the cityscape section, but there are two pictures of examples of art deco architecture right besides that section - Boston Avenue Methodist Church and the Philtower - if you still want more examples I will compromise on that and add some mentions.
 * I stand corrected about OU-Tulsa
 * I also stand corrected about Tulsa Tech and Spartan. They were there, but the only thing I can think of is I accidentily deleted them when I changed the subheadings in the section a while back - I agree they should be mentioned and I will put them back, no problem.
 * Mmmm I have some friends who gamble and they consider it a sport, I also have friends who would argue NASCAR isn't a sport. I still think the best place to mention gambiling is in sports, as I really dont think it makes sense in any other section. I don't think they are that important to the economy - at least, not more so than any other sport ot entertainment would be, so I dont think economy is the right place to put it. I don't see any alternative from the sports section but if you still feel that strongly that it shouldn't be in sports, then we need another place to put them. Like I said, sports just makes the most sense.
 * "Popular music has been shaped considerably by musicians from Tulsa or people and groups that started their musical careers in Tulsa, including Garth Brooks ..etc..." Garth Brooks qualifies as "From Tulsa": according to Garth brook's wikipedia article, as well as this website, He was Born in Tulsa. Therefore, the source that says he is from Tulsa (published by the Tulsa Library) is not wrong, and then the article is not wrong, as he is indeed from Tulsa.
 * About the water source - every major city needs a big reliable source of water to grow. This is not anything unique about Tulsa that should be specifically mentioned in its history section.
 * P.S. Ive already made revisions to the demographics section to include religion, and ive added a mention of the race riot in the lead.Okiefromokla•talk 02:34, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

In response to the response
 * The statue will be important once it starts to build. I may be a bit cynical, but I see the recent press as an attempt to drum up support for flagging project. I may be wrong, but to emphasize the statue before it is started seems to smack of the Crystal Ball. (Don't get me wrong I, truly hope that it gets built, am excited by the idea and like the proto-types I've seen pictures of. But I will believe it will happen when it happens.)
 * Since the bridge was important to the history of Tulsa and when you get down to it, the sports box is a stylistic issue I won't press the matter on the box, other than to say once again, I don't like it. There now I feel better.
 * I was vague about the race riot, and I apologize.
 * Limiting the mentions of the 18,000 seats would be a good thing. The "culmination of all architecture styles in Tulsa" may be what they asked for, but according to the pictures I've seen, it ain't what they got. It will be a striking building, and may become the architectural icon for Tulsa (but only if the big Indian doesn't get built), but it bears no resembalance anything else in town. I suppose a mention in the sports and arts section would be alright.
 * The problem with "Due to frequent flooding in past decades, Tulsa now has one of the most extensive flood control systems in the nation." is that it is wrong. Without the 1984 flood, the extensive flood control system would not have been implemented. It was the worst flood in Tulsa's history and overnight created a consensus that something had to be done. The city of Tulsa agrees with this assesment. (See here
 * ORU is a good addition. As for the others, people use articles in different ways. I am often text oriented and don't "see" the pictures on a first reading, so anything included in the images captions (and tables) is missed by me, so I really would like to see acouple of the more prominent Art Deco monuments included in the text. (I'll make a deal, any building you mention that doesn't have an article, I will write at least a stub article for, and if it ever stops raining get down to Tulsa and get a picture of it. I really like the Fire Alarm Building). I can let the others slide, although I really like Westhope.
 * Gambling, sad to say, needs to be mentioned, and I guess it fits just as well in sports as anywhere else, although it is not sport. (I feel better now, again)
 * Since you bring it to my attention I was misreading the opening statement on musicians. I only saw the "started their career portion" and not the "from" portion. Mea Culpa. Garth is "from" Tulsa. On Brooks and Dunn, Dunn is evidently from Tulsa, but not Brooks, so can we change it to "Ronnie Dunn of Brooks and Dunn"? Carrie Underwood is from Checotah and went to college in Tahlequah, neither of which is in the Tulsa Metroplitan Area.
 * Every city needs a water source, and Tulsa didn't have one. Without the building of the Spavinaw Reservoir and pipeline in the 1920s, Tulsa would not have grown. It was one of the most ambitious public work projects of its day and deserves mention. (See here and here.)
 * I have noted your revisions and struck the apropriate parts of my comments. Thank you. Dsmdgold 04:59, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

My stance on some of the issues: 1) I'll agree that the mentions of The American should be removed until they actually break ground. According to one of the sources in the article, they aren't expecting to break ground until Feb 08 (at the earliest). I think it could be left out until the construction is a reality. 2) I think the sports table should stay. Gives a lot of information is a concise way. 3) I have no problem with the mentioning of the new arena in several parts of the article but lets try to keep a long description of it in one place and leave the other mentions to just that, a mention. Do any other reviewers have a comment?↔NMajdan &bull;talk 15:03, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll comment. I am still keeping my support vote, as I am entirely on the fence WRT the imaginary giant statue issue.  However, it should be noted that several other reviewers have objected to its inclusion with valid reason, and it would be a shame to hold up featured status on that one issue.  When it becomes a reality in any sense (i.e. contruction begins) it can be put back in.  This is still a great article with or without it.


 * I am going to keep this brief since an edit conflict destroyed my list...
 * I deleted the statue from the lead - but kept it in history (but revised that paragraph so as not to mention it "Will" be built. There at least should be some mention of the plans of it in the article.
 * No offense meant at all, but I don't think you are qualified as an architectural expert to judge if the arena really incorporates those arcitectural styles. The newspaper article says it does, so that's all I know.
 * I went ahead and put the 1984 flood in climate, as well as the spavinaw dam in history.
 * lastly, the sentence says "people or groups from tulsa"... thats why I included Brooks&Dunn and not Ronnie Brooks and etc.. Because generally they come as a group. Its not really a big deal im not going to hang on it, we can seperate them if you want.
 * Ill finish the other issues weve agreed on too. Okiefromokla•talk 17:49, 8 May 2007 (UTC) I have struck all of preceding comments so as to consolidate the remaining discussion here.

Two new issues have come up though:
 * The impact of the early bridges still needs to be discussed.
 * Spartan still isn't mentioned, but Tulsa Tech is. This isn't vital. However, Spartan brings students from all over the world and was important in the development of Tulsa's aerospace industry, it would be nice to mention it.
 * The new Tulsa Symphony and the Signature Symphony might be mentioned, although I am uncertain if either is full-time. (I know the TS aspires to be, but I don't know if they are there yet.) If I can find sources I will add these. Again not vital.
 * It would be good to mention the now defunct pro Soccer and Basketball teams. Again not vital.
 * Since the article does mention the Tulsa Sound, it probably should mention Leon Russell and J.J. Cale, who were vital to its development. The GAP Band can probably slide.
 * The infrastructure section still needs to discuss rail transport through Tulsa. This is a serious gap.
 * Without mentioning KVOO, I haven't thought of a way of smoothly integrating Paul Harvey into the article. Since no other specific electronic media outlet is mentioned, KVOO shouldn't be brought up. So although Harvey is probably one of the most important broadcasters in radio history, he probably can't be worked into the article. (The only opening I can see is that I believe that KVOO is oldest still operating station (early 1920's) in Tulsa, but I have been unable to confirm this.)
 * The otherwise good paragraph on health care states that there are .921 hospital beds per capita. This works out to over 350K hospital beds. I am not sure what is meant, but as stated this is wrong.
 * The article also now states that "Telephone service is provided in large part by Cox Communications." Cox provides cable service and cable telephone service. Surely AT&T (formerly SWB), the traditional land line supplier is still larger. Dsmdgold 14:33, 9 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I am happy to announce that (I believe) all the above concnerns have now been met, as well as all the changes that have been agreed upon.
 * Just one note here: I added a passing mention of the bridge in the history section, but I really don't think anything more specific on it needs to be added. That is material for the main History of Tulsa, Oklahoma article. It's there for a reason: so it can be more detailed and comprehensive than the history section on the Tulsa article... Okiefromokla•talk 19:26, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Just about everything, I see that the lack of passenger rail service is mentioned now, but there is a lot freight going by rail through Tulsa. I guess I was thinking of that huge railyard on the west side of town when I mentioned rail infrastrucure. Dsmdgold 22:48, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't know anything about that rail center. But the major freight rail lines running through tulsa are in the article now, and I got that from a map, which I can put as a source if its felt needed. Otherwise, I wouldn't know what else to put about freight rails.Okiefromokla•talk 23:28, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

All of my concerns have been addressed or negotiated. Support Dsmdgold 23:34, 9 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Support, with a note. The current readable prose size is 50KB, which is the edge of the limit I'm comfortable with.  If the article grows over time, you may need to spin a section like History into its own article, using summary style.  Thanks for the fast work and attention to bringing the article to standard !  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 23:41, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.