Talk:Cincinnati

Districts

Should Cincinati follow the huge city article template? - (WT-en) Huttite 18:51, 7 Jan 2005 (EST)

Possibly. There are many different neighborhoods, but I'm not sure that it really matters. I've heard of most of the neighborhoods, but I don't know how to describe most of them, because I usually stick to downtown, East Walnut Hills, Obriensville, and Hyde Park.

I can help- let me know what I can do. RJH

Many of the neighborhoods have their own characteristics... so maybe group them all (all 52), or maybe by region: i.e., East (Mt. Lookout, Mt. Washington, Hyde Park, Oakley, O'Bryonville, Linwood, East End, East Walnut Hills), West (Western Hills, Covedale, Westwood, Price Hill, Fairmount, etc.), Central (Clifton Heights/Univ Heights/ Fairview, Mt. Auburn, Walnut Hills, Clifton, Mt. Adams, CBD, OTR,etc.)?

Would this really be helpful for the traveller? I'm hesitant about breaking Cincinnati down into districts, but I have to admit that the idea of a East/West district is somewhat interesting. Cincinnati is a fairly compact large city and I'm unconvinced of how useful districts would be. If we start providing excellent directions like the Windsor CVB did for Windsor (Ontario) there would probably be very little need for districts. -- (WT-en) Sapphire 01:42, 14 September 2006 (EDT)

I just now realized this was here, so this is good. I am interested in the East/West division for the district catagory. Maybe that would show how Cincinnatians REALLY live. —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) Lanskieth17 (talk • contribs) 02:17, 27 June 2007

How do Cincinnatians live is irrelevant to a travel guide and the whole east/west thing doesn't describe anything about Cincinnati at all. Do people on the west side stick to the west side only? Not really, but if they did it'd be because of the easiness of staying around your own neighborhood for entertainment, food, and whatever else. Dividing Cincinnati up into useless district articles won't help the traveler. -- (WT-en) Sapphire • (Talk) • 02:30, 27 June 2007 (EDT)

Since this is coming up again, I am curious—what is the distinction between West and East Cincinnati? Is it a purely geographical, convenient breakdown? Or is it a cultural division that deserves a note in the understand section? --(WT-en) Peter ^Talk 03:03, 27 June 2007 (EDT)

I think what Sapphire said is true-- but to answer your question the West and East have been historically/socially divided generally between the 75 highway (there are some exceptions though). Historically, those from the West side have been typically blue collar workers and the East side was composed of white collar workers. That doesnt mean there arent white collar workers on the West Side, because there are many. People show their West Side pride with the annual "West Fest" while people show their East Side pride by... going to Kenwood Mall. Lanskeith 17 13:19 27 June 2007

I think this article is a perfect size for its subject, and districting would spoil it. But I do think the West/East divide is worth mentioning somewhere in the article (not in the introduction), and West Fest should be in the Do section. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 17:13, 27 June 2007 (EDT)

"How do Cincinnatians live is irrelevant to a travel guide..." Um, as a Chicagoan looking to travel to Cincinnati soon, learning how other people live their lives is the fundamental reason I travel. So, yes, I would like to know very much how Cincinnatians live and how geography shapes their urban experience. David, Chicago, 23 Jan 2011

The Center for Holocaust and Humanity Education

The entry states

... which follows the stories of Cincinnatians involved in the resistance to Nazis and Holocaust survivors in Cincinnati. ...

Questions

• Where is Cincinnatti now and where was it during the second world war - Germany? - Has the city moved recently? - No
• Did the Nazis have a concentration camp in Cincinnatti? - No

I think it should read something like

... which follows the stories of Cincinnatians involved in the resistance to Nazis and Holocaust survivors now living in Cincinnati. ... -- (WT-en) Huttite 19:12, 25 Mar 2005 (EST)

What I meant was some of the people that the exhibit is about are Europeans, but there are also many subjects that were Cincinnatians that joined the Army-Air force, and intelliegence agents like Former US Ambassador to Luxembourg John E. Dolibois. Ambassador Dolibois interviewed Nazi officials on the false pretense that he was with the Red Cross and was there to see to it that he was not abused by the Americans. He was an American soldier and helped gather evidence against Nazis that was used in the Nuremburg trials. I think the way it was originally written works, because if you're a Cincinnatian you're currently living in Cincinnati. I think its kind of obvious, but it's not a life or death issue. - (WT-en) Sapphire

The way I interpreted the sentence, and it is ambiguous, it sounded like the Holocaust, and the Nazis, were in Cincinnati. Also I do not see a Cincinnatian as being someone living in Cincinnati but someone who has a cultural connection either by birth or lifestyle with Cincinnati. Just because you are alive and at one moment in time alive in Cincinnati does not make you a Cincinnatian, you need to have that birth, residential or cultural connection also. -- (WT-en) Huttite 01:35, 16 Apr 2005 (EDT)

That's true, and I would see it in the same way. I guess I just saw these people who have lived in Cincinnati for the past 10+ years as Cincinnatians and I would look upon a person from Flordia as a Floridian, until its established that that person is making Cincinnati home. As for the historic aspect I didn't mean to imply Cincinnati was in Europe or under control of the Nazi regime. :) (WT-en) Sapphire 18:15, 16 Apr 2005 (EDT)

Picture

Would anyone be able to add a picture of Cincinnati? I don't have a scanner and can't help out in this department. Thanks. - (WT-en) Sapphire

Cincinnatus

How about a mention of [[1]]?

A common misconception is that Cincinnati was named after Cincinnatus. The city was instead named after an American Revolution era organization that took its name from Cincinnatus. That's why there is no mention of the Roman ruler, but instead of the Society that bears his name. (WT-en) Sapphire 01:34, 9 Jan 2006 (EST)

Still that shold be noted, and wouldn't that mean cincinnati was named after him, albeit indirectly?

Too much information?

It seems like some of the information in this article is tending toward encyclopedia rather than travel guide. For example, I can kinda see the point of listing the colleges/universities, since since they may offer classes to the general public, but what about the high schools? Likewise, with the TV station list: even assuming it's useful to know what network is on which channel and your hotel neglects to include a list on the TV, does it matter to a traveler what their call letters are, or where the station's office is? Or where the newspapers' offices are? - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 23:29, 14 May 2006 (EDT)

I'm glad someone else feels that way. Consider it gone. (WT-en) Sapphire 23:34, 14 May 2006 (EDT)

New listings

I've converted every damn listing to the new coded listings, so that's why some things may turn out a little funky. Why have I done this? Some call it wikicrack. -- (WT-en) Andrew Haggard (Sapphire) 04:20, 16 August 2006 (EDT)

Reverted edits

I reverted several edits removing a few listings that are not in Cincinnati particularly the listing of religious services because some services such as the Greek Orthodox and Islamic Mosques are hard to come by in Cincinnati. I think there may be one mosque in Cincinnati, but I'm not positive. I feel the information should be in the Cincinnati guide, because if a Muslim traveler comes to Cincinnati he/she may very well want to go to a mosque and the most well-known mosque is in West Chester and we direct him/her to the correct city.

I also reverted a deleted reference to Newport, Kentucky since Newport is very easily accessable from Cincinnati (Purple People Bridge). Simply because something isn't in Cincinnati doesn't necessarily mean a listing or information should be removed, particularlly if it would be helpful to other travelers. -- (WT-en) Sapphire 17:05, 12 November 2006 (EST)

What is the geographical limitation for places included in the travel guide?

Should the article be limited Cincinnati Metro or just Cincinnati proper?

My suggestion for a limitation should be places that are actually in the City of Cincinnati or at least very close-less than 1 mile (ie Rockwood) or a regional attraction(ie king's island) should be included.

Places such as Brown Dog Cafe which is in Blue Ash (eat section) and the bookstore listed that is located in Madiera (buy section) would be excluded.

The Brown Dog Cafe can be moved to Blue Ash, and most listings and information should pertain to Cincinnati proper, but since we're helping travellers we need to have information that will be useful to travellers. I.e. under the "Drink" section we have information about how Newport on the Levee is a popular nightlife spot and that should be left in the article. -- (WT-en) Sapphire 23:35, 22 November 2006 (EST)

OTR

I know there's been some "revitalization" of OTR, but is it really enough to qualify as gentrification? Anyone? It's been a while (couple of months) since I've actually been in Over-The-Rhine, but nothing really looked different. Hmmm. I guess this gives me a reason to finally try breakfast at Tucker's. -- (WT-en) Sapphire • (Talk) • 01:16, 23 May 2007 (EDT)

I go through OTR frequently-- if you drive down Vine or even Walnut or Sycamore it is easy/suprising to see all of the revitalization! Its beginning to look completely different with all of the Gateway Quarter renovations and new resturants. Lanskeith17 2:24, 27 June 2007

Ferries?

Cincinnati, Ohio to Constance, Kentucky. All-year, continous daily service. Weather permitting. Car=about $3.00 or less. (WT-en) 2old 13:15, 22 June 2007 (EDT)

Introduction

I was wondering how other people feel about how I re-worked the introduction... I added a little bit of just general info (like population which I feel is important/relevant), and just a simple major attraction list. Lanskeith17 2:21, 27 June 2007

Ah, sorry I removed your attraction list before commenting here. I removed it because the attractions you listed already have entries further down in the article (at least for the ones I checked) and because our manual of style dictates that we put that kind of information in the listings entries (also see Project:District article template for more guidelines on where to stick information within a district article).

I also just wanted to mention that all your attention to the Cincinnati article is very much appreciated. If folks (including myself) are seeming especially persnickety about how the information on this page is displayed, it is because it is currently up for star status, which demands that the article follow the Project:Manual of style perfectly. --(WT-en) Peter ^Talk 03:18, 27 June 2007 (EDT)

It's not bad to have a quick summary of the city's main attractions in the introduction. That's where we're trying to sell the traveler on coming here. I don't think the specific population numbers would be useful for a traveler, but something like "fast-growing" might - correct me if that's not accurate. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 17:10, 27 June 2007 (EDT)

"Where did you sleep last night?"

I am sorry for commenting the way I did-- I didn't know of this 'talk' page untill now. I still believe the "Where did you sleep last night?" box is somewhat offensive:

"When you make a reservation at the "Embassy Suites Cincinnati", take a closer look at the address – it's actually in Covington, across the river in Kentucky. Many Covington hotels shamelessly play up their proximity to their more famous neighbor, keeping the dirty secret of the address down in the fine print. From Covington, it's only a short drive across the bridge to get back to downtown Cincinnati and the stadiums, so it's not an inconvenient option for travelers with cars. But if you're here for Cincinnati, it's best experienced in Cincinnati."

The following terms are offensive: shamelessly, dirty secret.

"Cincinnati USA" also includes NKY and SE Indiana-- and I believe that all three locations should work together inorder to prosper as one area. The leadership of all of the regions agree with that too.

Instead, why don't we change that to this: "When you make a reservation at the "Embassy Suites Cincinnati", take a closer look at the address – it's actually in Covington, across the river in Kentucky. Many Covington hotels use their proximity to their across-the-river neighbor to their advantage. From Covington, it's only a short drive across the bridge to get back to downtown Cincinnati and the stadiums, so it's not an inconvenient option for travelers with cars. But if you're here for Cincinnati, it's best experienced in Cincinnati."

Thanks, Lanskeith17 2:31, 27 June 2007

I'm going to disagree with you, just because Covington is a boring place compared to Newport or Cincinnati, or anywhere else in the Tri-State for that matter. It is rather shameful that hotels trick travelers by thinking they're in Cincinnati. Sure, Covington has some interesting architecture, but that's about it. It even goes for Marriott's "Cincinnati North" hotel in Mason, which is roughly 20 miles from Cincinnati. I wonder if Newport tries and pulls the same type of trickery, but if they do, at least they have something to offer travelers in the way of entertainment, food, and nightlife. -- (WT-en) Sapphire • (Talk) • 16:45, 27 June 2007 (EDT)

Thanks for coming to the talk page, Keith. It'd be great if you could help us with the Covington (Kentucky) page, as it's still an incomplete guide, and since you seem to have some knowledge about Northern Kentucky, you might be able to help identify what's special about the city for travelers.

I removed the line that was specifically derogatory toward the city of Covington itself, because I'm willing to believe that the area has something of its own to offer. But the words "shamelessly" and "dirty secret" refer to the behavior of the hotels themselves, not the city, and I don't agree that they're offensive or inappropriate. First of all, we're not trying to be unbiased like Wikipedia. We're biased toward what's good for the traveler, and we're biased against deceptive practices by hotels, travel agencies, and the like. We also like lively writing, and calling a spade a spade. Frankly, using your name to foster the impression that you are in a completely different city - let alone a completely different state - is shameless. And the hotels are the ones who treat their location like a dirty secret. If those hotels were called Embassy Suites Covington, we wouldn't be having this conversation! (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 17:01, 27 June 2007 (EDT)

Spring Grove Cemetery

Any reason why Spring Grove Cemetery was removed? Also Quatman Cafe?

(WT-en) Youjane1 23:11, 19 July 2007 (EDT)

Sapphire, I wish you would explain why you keep deleting Spring Grove Cemetery (and also Quatman if that was in fact you). Like I said on your talk page, it is a Cincinnati landmark, and it's also an arboretum. Hell people even get married there. What's your beef with Spring Grove?

(WT-en) Youjane1 16:04, 28 August 2007 (EDT)

Spring Grove Cemetery is not as well-known landmark as you make it sound. Please read number seven of the Project:Goals and non-goals#Non-Goals. Would you honestly recommend a friend visit Spring Grove Cemetery? If you can say yes, then by all means include information about the place, but make the damn description lively (pun intended) and not so dull. In fact, don't mention the cemetery's history, just give us the straight facts about why it's interesting. I assure you, no one has ever gone to a cemetery for sightseeing purposes, unless a cemetery is one of the rare exceptions, but Spring Grove isn't one of those. If it's really as interesting as you think it is, make me and everyone else who will ever read it believe so. If you can do that, I can live with SGC in the guide. -- (WT-en) Sapphire • (Talk) • 16:52, 28 August 2007 (EDT)

I've never been to Spring Grove, so I can't argue its specific merits, but I think the most recent description established it as worth notice to at least a few visitors - Civil War buffs, for example, would want to investigate further if major generals were buried there. I'm not a goth or a ghoul, but I do believe there are quite a few cemeteries around the world that are visited for sightseeing purposes - Pere Lachaise (Jim Morrison, Oscar Wilde) in Paris and St. Louis Cemetery #1 (Marie Laveau, voodoo) in New Orleans come to mind. From personal experience, Novodevichy Cemetery in Moscow has a mind-blowing amount of incredible sculptures, and was the most memorable experience I had there. I went to a cemetery in the Chicago suburbs just because it had a monument to a semi-obscure historical event (the Haymarket martyrs). And I used to work for a rabbi who directed sightseeing expeditions to Jewish cemeteries, who toured them for heritage reasons. Again, I don't know anything about Spring Grove, but I don't think you should hold a blanket ban on listing cemeteries. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 18:39, 28 August 2007 (EDT)

I've reinserted the listing, but please, please make the description less annoying. I doubt travelers care much about how old the cemetery is, but explain why it would be of interest to them. I.e. on some nation historical register, hosts concerts, blah blah blah, not just that some famous dead people reside here. -- (WT-en) Sapphire • (Talk) • 21:29, 28 August 2007 (EDT)

I would certainly recommend it more than the Fire Museum or some of the other things on the page...just because something isn't your cup of tea personally doesn't mean it doesn't belong on the page. -- (WT-en) Youjane1 • (Talk) • 9:04, 20 August 2007 (EDT)

I agree that cemeteries can often have a place in the see section of articles, depending of course on the cemetery. The description could use some beefing up, though, to "sell" the attraction to interested travelers. <own horn toot>A nice example is the blurb for Oak Woods Cemetery in Chicago.</own horn toot> --(WT-en) Peter ^Talk 09:14, 29 August 2007 (EDT)

Sapphire, you do great work and I enjoy your comments, but I am somewhat of a cemetery freak also. New Orleans and Key West have tours which are very interesting and the stone carvings are a great expression of art. On my weekly wanderings I frequently photograph monuments. I have been hesitant to add them to Wikishared, but I think I will start (new travel topic?). The different burial practices around the world are interesting and a reflection of faith and ones love for the deceased, although it is not for me, most of my family goes for cremation. Take care and keep up the great work on Ohio. (WT-en) 2old 09:27, 29 August 2007 (EDT)

Guys, thanks for not lynching me. I had a moment of where I didn't consider consensus. Oh well, as I was reconsidering my stance I realized that even though I find the place terribly boring I should have considered it a little more. I'm not as hostile as I was because apparently the place hosts concerts, though I think that's creepy, not to mention getting married at a cemetery so 'mom could be there.' -- (WT-en) Sapphire • (Talk) • 10:07, 29 August 2007 (EDT)

I think it's a beautiful place...not sure I'd want to get married there but I can understand why some people would...anyway I modified the description, the rest of you please feel free to tweak as you deem appropriate. Thanks. -- (WT-en) Youjane1 • (Talk) • 14:54, 29 August 2007 (EDT)

Thanks for working with the feedback, and I hope you'll stick around. When an article is as built-up as Cincinnati, new entries can take a little negotiation, but they're still appreciated. I thought the mention of Civil War generals was an interesting point from a previous revision - you might restore that reference and mention one or two of them by name, if they were noteworthy. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 19:05, 29 August 2007 (EDT)

Lead image

• 
• 

The image on the left was recently replaced with the image on the right. I find the new one to be inferior compositionally, with two-thirds of it taken up by the river and the skyline squeezed into just the top portion. The coloring is also drab and gray compared to the sun-lit landscape seen in the older image. Thoughts? (WT-en) LtPowers 11:52, 3 January 2012 (EST)

The new one is up because the skyline has changed quite a bit with the banks being complete, the PNC Logo changing on the old Central Trust Tower and the Queen City Tower with its tiara in the sky. If you can get a replacement from Devou Park that is a much better angle but was taken on a better day I'm all for it. --(WT-en) Neilworms 11:25, 16 July 2012 (EDT)

This has been fixed thanks to the wonderful wikimedia photo archive. --Neilworms (talk) 16:32, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Alternative banner for this article?

In the Hebrew Wikivoyage we are currently using this banner instead of the one which is currently used here. Do you think too that this banner would would better than the existing one? ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 07:34, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

It's a very different kind of banner, but I certainly prefer it, but then I like panoramas. The current one is interestingly quirky, though, so let's see whether anyone disagrees before the change is (potentially) made. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:48, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm no fan of generic skyline panoramas, but the current banner doesn't strike me as particularly distinctive. The buildings pictured may be landmarks but they don't make a particularly compelling banner. LtPowers (talk) 20:33, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

But between the current banner and this one, which one do you like better? I can't tell from your remarks. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:39, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

I like the current banner quite a bit as it highlights something that is really underappreciated in Cincinnati that visitors might find intriguing - its historic architecture. Over-The-Rhine is one of the largest historic distrcts in the United States, its revitalization should be celebrated and honored, as well as touted so that the rest of the world should know about it. I strongly support keeping it over a panorama shot, as it really highlights just how different Cincinnati is from its typical peer Midwestern cities and encourages curious visitors to take a closer look at what the city has to offer. Also, there is already a very fine skyline shot at the beginning of the article.--Neilworms (talk) 17:01, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Speaking solely from an aesthetic standpoint, though, I'd much rather see the two swapped. The current skyline pic has lots of empty space in it due to its height/width ratio, while the banner shot of the historic district shows so little of the buildings as to be nearly useless. If we put the skyline in the banner and made Over-The-Rhine the lead image, I think it would work a whole lot better. Powers ^(talk) 00:11, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

I agree with LtPowers' suggestion that the new banner be implemented and the lede image also be switched to this photo, which the current banner was cropped from. Any objections?
Thatotherperson^talkcontribs 06:49, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

I don't object, but I think we should hear from Neilworms before any change is made. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:27, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

I agree with the switch, as long as both images are represented and prominent :-)--Neilworms (talk) 19:36, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Bible Belt comment

Someone had removed the comment regarding how places being closed on Sunday were due to Cincinnati's proximity to the bible belt. I propose keeping it. I know Cincinnati is at such a place where its culturally sensitive to being a border city between the North and South (I know I used to live there), however its the perception of people from cities to the north of Cincinnati that its culturally more Southern than most Northern cities - I know this because I've lived in Chicago for a few years and there are many differences including the fact businesses aren't closed on Sunday they are closed on Monday and this is due to differences in religiosity. I think this would be helpful for people coming from places where this isn't the case, they may be pretty shocked OTR of all places has most restaurants closed on Sunday. Finally I understand Cincinnati is predominantly Catholic, but its a much more conservative strain of Catholicism than one would find further north. Evangelical religion also is far more obvious than it is further north and culturally influential too.

Besides, Cincinnati by most measures is right by the bible belt, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible_Belt https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c2/BibleBelt.png

Any thoughts? --Neilworms (talk) 18:59, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Article split

Hi, everyone. I've never been to Cincinnati and have no opinion about whether or how the city should be districted, but I don't see any thread in which there was a proposal that was agreed to. Is everyone now on board with the efforts that are currently being made and in agreement on where the boundaries should be? Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:50, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

I'm open to discussing how the subarticles should be split up. I've traveled to Cincinnati many times (I'm actually there right now!) and it's pretty clear that Downtown and Over-the-Rhine (OTR) have enough attractions that they should get their own subarticles—Downtown has 50 markers and OTR has 41. For my other suggested subarticles (which I linked to but haven't split yet), Mount Adams (just east of Downtown) has 11 markers, Clifton (just north of Downtown and OTR) has 14, and Northside (just northeast of Clifton) has 9. So these may or may not justify their own articles. Everything else should be grouped into Western Cincinnati and Eastern Cincinnati articles. Splitting up this article as been discussed as early as 2005, and it was pretty clear that before splitting it was overly long and hard to navigate. Antony-22 (talk) 04:21, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Sounds good to me, but what do others say, and what are the boundaries between the different districts? Also, 9 attractions would be enough for a separate district, but if the 9 is one attraction, 2 restaurants and 6 hotels, that's a lot more doubtful. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:29, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

There are enough sites Downtown and enough bars and restaurants of note Over-The-Rhine to be districts, for the rest I would initially suggest just an outer city area. Most of the Greater Cincinnati suburbs of note have their own articles. --Traveler100 (talk) 17:41, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

There are still around 80–90 markers in "outer" Cincinnati. Perhaps we can combine Clifton and Northside, and then split the rest East–West, which is a traditional Cincinnati cultural division? Antony-22 (talk)

Guide article with empty see section?

I'm sorry if I sound harsh, but how does an article with an empty see section fulfill the requirement for a guide article? I'd prefer to keep this article at guide status, but I've never visited Cincinnati or Ohio for that matter, so I can't really do it myself. If it does not get filled within a month (which is reasonable), I will be downgrading it to informative as no guide city article has a missing "see" section. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 07:26, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Since there has been no further comment, I've downgraded the article to outline. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 12:06, 25 June 2022 (UTC)