Norman, Oklahoma has been listed as one of the
Geography and places good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: July 28, 2013. ( Reviewed version). |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Archives: |
To-do list for Norman, Oklahoma:
|
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Norman, Oklahoma article.
I noticed that someone added some information on the recent finding of high levels of hexavalient chromium in Norman's water supply to the Utilities section of the article; someone else then added similar information to the top-level portion of the article. In thinking about it, the information added at the very top level of the article really seems like Wikipedia:Recentism to me, which is something to be avoided in Wikipedia articles. On the other hand this information seems at home in the Utilities section since it is a very applicable concern. I intend to delete the text from the top of the article and merge any differences into what is already in the Utilities section of the article. If you disagree let's talk about that here.
Also I am wondering if maybe since Norman now has two known issues with our water supply, that being high levels of the above in addition to high levels of arsenic, if perhaps it might make sense to add a subsection under the Utilities section to go into greater detail about all of this? Perhaps something like 9.3 Utilities / 9.3.1 Water Supply Controversy or something like that? Thoughts? Okguy ( talk) 23:57, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi there, I thought perhaps this most recent edit should be discussed further here. In the drinking water controversy section I had originally worded a sentence to say that the California research organization believes chromium-6 to be a carcinogen, but that was recently changed to is a carcinogen. The reason I had worded the sentence the original way is because I reviewed many scientific documents and what I found was that chromium-6 had been proven to be a carcinogen when inhaled as a particulate by miners, but it had never been proven to be a carcinogen when consumed in drinking water until 2006. In 2006 a study was done by the NIH which showed an increase of bowel cancers in lab mice when consuming chromium-6. Two important notes about the study as I remember them are that it was the first study of its kind, and generally in science it takes many experiments to show true causation, and secondly that the amounts of chromium-6 that the animals were subjected to if you were to extrapolate to human sizes would have been some 20 times the median values currently seen in water nation-wide. In fact if you review the Brokovich case there was never a ruling of fact that chromium-6 was a carcinogen, let alone the cause of the California town's cancer rates. Yes it may very well be that there is a relationship there, but from a science standpoint I do not believe that has yet been proven. Regardless, courts of law do not dictate scientific fact. The scientific method dictates that once a hypothesis has been generated a test case is run to attempt to disprove it. Once there are findings they are published, and then other scientists attempt to repeat those results over and over again. Eventually when there is consensus as to the results that hypothesis becomes a theory. If you read the science (I think I linked to the NIH report as a reference) this is clearly where they are at on the topic. As a result, I think that the wording "...is a carcinogen" is incorrect. Perhaps my wording was too lenient though, I am open to suggestions, but I just don't think undeniable fact has been established yet. I think the section needs to be reworded again. Thoughts? Okguy ( talk) 00:27, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
The External Links section is not a place for advertising your business or fire-fighting agency. All of the links provided in this section are supplemental material to something referenced in the article. If you want to reference something here then you need to find a way to work it into the article as well. Okguy ( talk) 19:01, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
This section was moved to its own article and entitled List of people from Norman, Oklahoma. A link to it now appears in the See Also section.
I reworked this paragraph to make the text more neutral and also added references and links to other pages. To the unsigned person who keeps changing the name of the house to "Moore-Lindsay Historical House" please note that this text is set up as a link to an article, and when you change the name of that text it changes color to red because you have broken the article link. You can leave the link in place but override its name using the "pipe" character, you will find examples throughout the Norman article. Or you can use the name of the article as it is. Okguy ( talk) 06:38, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
If you are listing School Districts, you left out the Noble School District, which covers a large chunk of eastern Norman. See this map for details. -- plaws ( talk) 15:42, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
This new(er) section contains only one entry about the Bavinger House. You know, the section was added the day that there was a lot of coverage of the house in the local media having to do with some severe damage the home took. It was recently written in the Transcript and the Oklahoman that it's believed the house has been completely torn down now. Because the section seems to fall into the Wikipedia negative category of "recentism," contains only information on the architectural item that is recentist in nature, and the item highlighted is now no more, I wonder if this section should really even exist? Okguy ( talk) 04:57, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
I have looked over the article as requested at Wikiproject Oklahoma Requests. At this time I have to say that its not really ready to be listed as a B-Class article, this is because of a few minor things that need to be fixed. I have made notes on what need to be fixed and I will post them below.
Other then the issues I listed above the article is well written and vary informative and I would have no problem raising the assessment class once the issues are fixed. Once the issues are fixed make another request at Wiki-project Oklahoma Requests or contact me on my talk page and I would be happy to take another look. If you have any questions ask them here I will be following the page and I will try to answer them as quickly as I can.-- Dch eagle 06:42, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
Just to make it easier for me to keep track of, the list of items that I still need to look into is:
Everything else not listed should have already been taken care of.
Okguy (
talk) 06:32, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Everything is done! Please reassess. Okguy ( talk) 04:57, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
This article seems to be very comprehensive, and I was wondering if we should go ahead and nominate it as a good article? I think it meets WP:WIAGA. Michael73072 ( talk) 21:11, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: - Adam37 Talk 15:36, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | ||
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | ||
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | ||
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | 150 sources, all of which appear properly formatted. | |
2c. it contains no original research. | No first-person or on-the-ground sources are used for contestable statements, save for recent photographs excepted from no original research in my view. | |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | Compared to other articles on comparable cities in population, Norman is very well developed, even to the extent of having sourced data about Neighborhoods which rightly sets those places out with notable facts and negates the twin perils of editors indulging in significant overlap and of readers setting up articles which do not meet standalone notability. | |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | No deviations | |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | ||
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | ||
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | ||
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | ||
7. Overall assessment. |
Norman's article has only one shortcoming in my view, having regard to all the good article criteria and some links are broken. - Adam37 Talk 15:36, 23 July 2013 (UTC) Reviewer: Adam37 ( talk · contribs) 15:36, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
The article stated:
"Shortly after this the Arbuckle Trail, a feeder route to the Chisholm Trail, was developed to hasten the transfer of cattle from Texas to the railroads in Kansas. A federal survey of the empty lands along the Arbuckle Trail was undertaken in the early 1870s, headed by 23-year-old Abner Norman."
I feel that a careful reading of p. 6 of the source [1] shows that the survey wasn't particularly connected to the Arbuckle Trail. The paragraph about the Trail immediately precedes the paragraph about the survey, and that was taken to mean that there was some connection between the two. I removed the mention of the Arbuckle Trail, since it only serves to confuse at that point.
Rather, the survey was of an area the book calls "the unassigned lands", a reference to ceded lands previously discussed on p. 5.
It is unclear to me whether the area of the survey was exactly the same as that described and mapped in Unassigned Lands, so I decided not to wikilink that, or capitalize it. Mandruss ( talk) 17:13, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
In the Geography section, the source provided for the coordinates is here. The decimal-format coordinates given there are 35.240577, -97.345306. The article's text states the decimal coordinates as 35.2217; -97.4183 (35.2216, −97.4182). It is unclear why the two very slightly different versions are given, but in any case neither version agrees with the source.
Converting the source's decimal coordinates to degrees-minutes format (rounding to the nearest minute) gives 35°14'N 97°21'W. This location is almost four miles east and slightly north of the article's current coordinates, 35°13'N 97°25'W. It is about two miles west of Lake Thunderbird and appears to approximate the geographical center of Norman city limits.
I'm not sure how to resolve this, which is why I am starting this talk section. If there's a method consistently used in Wikipedia articles for cities of this size, I haven't found it. But it's clearly wrong to cite a source and then differ from it. As I see it, there are at least two reasonable options:
Any comments? Mandruss ( talk) 22:17, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Norman, Oklahoma. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 22:36, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Norman, Oklahoma. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.census.gov/prod/www/abs/decennial/When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:06, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Norman, Oklahoma. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:48, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Norman, Oklahoma. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:05, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 20 external links on Norman, Oklahoma. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.studentmedia.ou.edu/{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://normantranscript.com/homepage/x518993409/I-35-widening-will-be-a-fast-track-project?keyword=leadpicturestoryWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 14:00, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Material from List of mayors of Norman, Oklahoma was split to Norman, Oklahoma on 25 August 2017 from this version. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted so long as the latter page exists. Please leave this template in place to link the article histories and preserve this attribution. The former page's talk page can be accessed at Talk:List of mayors of Norman, Oklahoma. |
Greetings old friends. I updated the mayoral information bringing it current, and I removed the update banner that was above this section. I also updated the police department paragraph with current information. I updated sources on all. I also did some minor clean-up here and there throughout the document, such as rolling to 2020 statistics data (from 2010) and adding at least one sentence to better transition / add a bridge between what was too obviously two different writers.
I noticed that we still have a few question marks in the list of mayors. I happen to have recently purchased a few historical books on Norman; I will see if I can fill in the gaps. Okguy ( talk) 21:11, 14 October 2022 (UTC)