This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Jclemens (talk | contribs) at 04:49, 10 June 2010 (Reverted edits by Snottywong (talk) to last version by Bearian). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 04:49, 10 June 2010 by Jclemens (talk | contribs) (Reverted edits by Snottywong (talk) to last version by Bearian)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Upstate New York
- Upstate New York (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fixing formatting of discussion page, presumably Farine is the nominator Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 20:42, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Saying this article is a total mess would be an understatement. The article is too long and filled with POV and unsourced statements. I wouldn'tbe surprised if there was some original research involved in it as well.
For months, the tags complaining about the article's original research and POV have been there. And yet, little change has been brought in the article to correct the situation.
I say delete the article and start all over again from skratch. Farine (talk) 01:36, 6 June 2010 (UTC) (View log • AfD statistics)
Point taken. Let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater. I'm editing some sections further, and spinning off lists as well as sections that seem particularly controversial into separate articles. Cheers, Don Argus jr (talk) 19:27, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
- I agree that Upstate New York is notable enough to deserve its own article. But the article in its current state is terrible and not reliable. I am in favor in keeping it if the article is heavily reworked. I personally don't know much about Upstate New York. But if you and other folks want to correct its flaws,I say go for it.Farine (talk) 19:39, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Fair enough; we will. You'll see on the "Talk" page of the article that there is not even a consensus regarding the definition of "Upstate" New York. This generates further problems for the writing of an encyclopedia article about the place. For example: what specific areas are included when trying to cite statistics for the region? My position is that this lack of consensus, and the contentiousness with which such issues are debated, is emblematic of the issues facing the region, and is part of the character of Upstaters - and that this is a big part of what makes the region notable and worthy of a separate Misplaced Pages article. But as I say, this is also what makes it hard to write one. It's kind of like using cats in a scientific study. As the author Vicky Hearn points out in her book Adam's Task, scientists shy away from using cats because "cats screw up your data." But she says that this doesn't make cats unworthy of study; rather, she says, it's exactly what ought to be studied. Similarly, the debate and discussion about this article is so much more illuminating than a resolved Wiki-compliant article would be. Don Argus jr (talk) 20:37, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
- Strong and Speedy Keep All of the problems with this article can be fixed by editting, deletion is not an answer when the subject is plainly notable, as this one is. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 20:45, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
- Comment What started out as a straight forward article somehow got turned into misguided attempt to duplicate the existing page about the state of New York, the premise being that if Upstate New York is all of New York outside of New York City, then the geography of Upstate New York is the geography of the state (minus New York City), the climate of Upstate New York is the climate of the state (minus New York City), the politics of Upstate New York is... etc. It's interesting to see how this got way out of hand. In its first year, it was a 7KB article (as of Jan'05); 16KB as '06 began; 26KB at '07; 45KB in '08; 88KB by '09.... the difference between this one and the BP oil spill is that people recognize the oil spill as a mess. Mandsford 21:08, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
- Delete This is basically a retread of the New York State article, minus mention of New York City and Westchester County. There is no need for two articles on the same subject. Regent of the Seatopians (talk) 22:57, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
- Keep and rewrite. Perhaps something more akin to North Country, New York, as most of the major areas already have their own entries. Movementarian (Talk) 23:40, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
- Keep This region is common knowledge to many Americans - I've used the region to describe a locale myself and I live far from there. Make it into a stub or revert back to the mid 2000s if necessary but don't delete. Editing is needed, not deletion. Royalbroil 23:54, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
- Keep The article sucks? So do 80% of Misplaced Pages articles. The region is difficult to define? So is Eastern Europe and the Southern United States. These aren't valid reasons to delete an article, though. AlexiusHoratius 03:26, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
- Keep. The topic is clearly notable and worth having an article in the encyclopedia about; in fact, this article has been on Misplaced Pages for over six years. On the other hand, this article seems to go on and on with hardly any citations, which indicates a failure of some kind. Consider reverting back to an acceptable version from the past, per Mandsford and Royalbroil, but deletion is not the best way to deal with this article's problems. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:37, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
- Keep: for many of the reasons above. why not do a complete re-write as is happening at the Albany article ---华钢琴49 (TALK) 04:02, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
- Keep and rewrite, as mentioned above. NYCRuss ☎ 06:19, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
- Keep AfD is not cleanup. The term and region is extremely common. There's no argument here at all; if you have a problem with an article, fix it and discuss on the talk page. Nate • (chatter) 11:20, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - The article's a mess? Wp:SOFIXIT applies here. And the region is difficult to define? So is East Anglia (eg are Northamptonshire and Essex part of it) - and no-one's considering deleting it. DitzyNizzy (aka Jess)|(talk to me)|(What I've done) 12:21, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
- Keep: A lot of work has to be done here, but this does not justify a delete (see above). Dewritech (talk) 13:41, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep: Deletion is not an appropriate method to reach cleanup goals. Article should be fixed as needed with history intact. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 18:03, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep'. duh.--Milowent (talk) 21:15, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:48, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - The nom has only stated reasons for article improvement, not deletion.--Oakshade (talk) 02:25, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - it is a mess, but not horribly so, and is clearly notable. We should rescue it. Disclosure: I have lived therein since 1982, except for four summers. Bearian (talk) 20:48, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
- I just removed a lot of the cruft. Can anyone help? Bearian (talk) 21:09, 8 June 2010 (UTC)