Talk:Capital District
Latest comment: 7 years ago by LtPowers in topic County criteria
Is there a need to have a region level below this one? The county pages have no information on them that could not be put at this level and there are only 10 town article. --Traveler100 (talk) 09:12, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
- At the moment, you're correct. Obviously there'll be a need for subdivision in the future, but the county articles are bare-bones at best and it doesn't seem we'd lose anything by merging. (And of course, county articles may not be the best way to subdivide, either.) Powers (talk) 02:40, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
disambiguation needed
editThis should be a disambiguation page, since there are many both formal "Capital Districts" ("Distritos Capitals," etc.) and informal "capital districts" throughout the world, e.g. Washington, DC and Bogotá, DC. "Capital District (New York)" is neither the most populous nor the most notable capital district in the world (Washington, DC probably takes that honor). Nicole Sharp (talk) 03:40, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
- Make it a disambig and move this to the article you suggest. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:17, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
- Well the name Capital District is, in USA terms anyway, an old longstanding name for the region, however it is from today's perspective ambiguous. If you do make this article title a disambiguation page please be careful how it is done. First move this page to the new name to preserve the history. Then edit the redirect page created by the move and edit to a disabig page. Also please do not forget to edit the isPartOf field of all the cities in this region and edit pages linking to this one so they reference the correct page. --Traveler100 (talk) 08:41, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
- Traveler100 is right. And to make it explicit, you will need to look at "What links here" on the sidebar of the article and edit the links in all those articles, plus the IsPartOf in every article for anyplace in the Capital District around Albany, New York. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:48, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
- Hold on. I named this article as it was because we don't have any other "Capital Districts" on the site. This is the only article so named. I don't think it's in our policy to consider redirects when determining whether an article is the primary topic for a name, is it? Powers (talk) 18:51, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
- Traveler100 is right. And to make it explicit, you will need to look at "What links here" on the sidebar of the article and edit the links in all those articles, plus the IsPartOf in every article for anyplace in the Capital District around Albany, New York. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:48, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
- Well the name Capital District is, in USA terms anyway, an old longstanding name for the region, however it is from today's perspective ambiguous. If you do make this article title a disambiguation page please be careful how it is done. First move this page to the new name to preserve the history. Then edit the redirect page created by the move and edit to a disabig page. Also please do not forget to edit the isPartOf field of all the cities in this region and edit pages linking to this one so they reference the correct page. --Traveler100 (talk) 08:41, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
city merge?
edit
As the city of Cohoes and Watervliet (New York) do not have any hotels should we merge their contents into Albany (New York) and extent it to an article for all locations in Albany County. --Traveler100 (talk) 18:35, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
- Cohoes and Watervliet aren't even adjacent to Albany. They're adjacent to Troy, which might be worth considering as a merge target. Powers (talk) 19:51, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
- Troy would be another alternative. As you point out distance wise it is a closer city, although across the river and in another county. Depend on which criteria makes more sense. --Traveler100 (talk) 20:00, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
- Another option is to create North Albany County as a city article that contains Cohoes and Waterviliet, and even consider moving the listings out of Albany that are in Colonie. --Traveler100 (talk) 15:11, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
- Another alternative is Cohoes, Waterviliet, Latham and add Waterford (New York) (which is worth a visit for the end of the Erie Canal). Not sure about name though, maybe something involving Mohawk/Hudson Confluence. --Traveler100 (talk) 15:11, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
- We've been over this business with the "sleep test" time and time again, and it's getting tedious. The sleep test was never intended as a hard-and-fast rule that any place that happens to lack a hotel is not a valid subject for a Wikivoyage article. It's meant as a rule of thumb to differentiate destinations, which are valid subjects for articles, from attractions, which are not. (See this discussion). Cohoes and Watervliet are both sizable places whose article contains a few "See" listings, and there are certainly options for those who want to add "Eat", "Drink", etc. listings. There is no valid pro-merger argument here, and frankly I'm troubled by the recent "merge-and-redirect mania" here at Wikivoyage. In the case of undeveloped articles, the default should always be to keep them as is and let them evolve naturally unless there's a good reason not to. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 19:29, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
- On the face of it, I agree with you, Andrew. I also have this question: User:Traveler100, do you know for sure that there are no hotels or motels whatsoever in Cohoes and Watervliet? I would find that surprising. And I'd further state that a lack of user-contributed content to articles about towns that actually do have places to stay, things to see and do, etc. is a bad reason for a redirect. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:57, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
- I am reasonably certain there is nothing in Cohoes, but I have also come to the conclusion that it should have its own article because of the history of the place and the fact it is an up and coming area. I will also at some point add some more information and some of my photographs of Watervliet and Waterford (which may deserve an article). --Traveler100 (talk) 20:00, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
- Cohoes IMO deserves its own page ... it's a small city, but it's got a fascinating history that includes not just the canal but the Harmony Mills National Historic Landmark District complex, the largest surviving early textile mill outside of New England. Likewise, Watervliet has the eponymous arsenal, also a National Historic Landmark as the oldest continuously operating arsenal in the U.S. (and yes, there is a public museum). Daniel Case (talk) 22:33, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
- I recall double-checking Cohoes' lack of accommodations when this discussion was first begun. Google Maps knew of nothing within the borders of Cohoes. That doesn't mean there's no B&B or fleabag motel, just none that Google knew of. That said, Latham has a bunch, because that's where the airport is, and many of them are within spitting distance of Cohoes. Powers (talk) 20:32, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
- Cohoes IMO deserves its own page ... it's a small city, but it's got a fascinating history that includes not just the canal but the Harmony Mills National Historic Landmark District complex, the largest surviving early textile mill outside of New England. Likewise, Watervliet has the eponymous arsenal, also a National Historic Landmark as the oldest continuously operating arsenal in the U.S. (and yes, there is a public museum). Daniel Case (talk) 22:33, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
- I am reasonably certain there is nothing in Cohoes, but I have also come to the conclusion that it should have its own article because of the history of the place and the fact it is an up and coming area. I will also at some point add some more information and some of my photographs of Watervliet and Waterford (which may deserve an article). --Traveler100 (talk) 20:00, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
- On the face of it, I agree with you, Andrew. I also have this question: User:Traveler100, do you know for sure that there are no hotels or motels whatsoever in Cohoes and Watervliet? I would find that surprising. And I'd further state that a lack of user-contributed content to articles about towns that actually do have places to stay, things to see and do, etc. is a bad reason for a redirect. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:57, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
- We've been over this business with the "sleep test" time and time again, and it's getting tedious. The sleep test was never intended as a hard-and-fast rule that any place that happens to lack a hotel is not a valid subject for a Wikivoyage article. It's meant as a rule of thumb to differentiate destinations, which are valid subjects for articles, from attractions, which are not. (See this discussion). Cohoes and Watervliet are both sizable places whose article contains a few "See" listings, and there are certainly options for those who want to add "Eat", "Drink", etc. listings. There is no valid pro-merger argument here, and frankly I'm troubled by the recent "merge-and-redirect mania" here at Wikivoyage. In the case of undeveloped articles, the default should always be to keep them as is and let them evolve naturally unless there's a good reason not to. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 19:29, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
- Another alternative is Cohoes, Waterviliet, Latham and add Waterford (New York) (which is worth a visit for the end of the Erie Canal). Not sure about name though, maybe something involving Mohawk/Hudson Confluence. --Traveler100 (talk) 15:11, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
- Another option is to create North Albany County as a city article that contains Cohoes and Waterviliet, and even consider moving the listings out of Albany that are in Colonie. --Traveler100 (talk) 15:11, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
- Troy would be another alternative. As you point out distance wise it is a closer city, although across the river and in another county. Depend on which criteria makes more sense. --Traveler100 (talk) 20:00, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
County criteria
editAny reason the counties for this Capital District are different than that of the Wikipedia page? —The preceding comment was added by 24.97.28.59 (talk • contribs)
- In short, because they serve two different purposes. People visiting the Capital District will have different parameters for the scope of their trip than someone learning about the history and politics of the area. Powers (talk) 19:00, 22 July 2017 (UTC)