Talk:Pacific Park, Brooklyn

Merge

Don't Merge The arena is one element of a more complex project, and deserves its own article, just like there are separate articles for New Jersey Meadowlands, Meadowlands Sports Complex and Giants Stadium. Milchama 23:42, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Support Don't Merge. The area is approx. 6 times larger than the proposed arena sight. - Alsandro · T · w:ka: Th · T 00:00, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Can we get rid of the tag already? There hasn't been much response over this proposed merger. I have significantly edited the Brooklyn Nets Arena article so its about the arena, and not the controversy over the Atlantic Yards (although I left some of that in, although the bulk of it should be on the Atlantic Yards article.) Milchama 21:38, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup tag

I tagged for cleanup:

1. The lists are too long, there should be a better way to get that information across
2. Perhaps there could be better organization of the content
3. A lot of content needs to be copyedited (maybe it was cut and pasted?)
4. There needs to be a universal references section

These are just a couple of my thoughts for now. Take care. --Howrealisreal 21:44, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

The biggest problem with this article is that info about the controversy over the project outweighs information about it. More details are needed about how many buildings will be included, how much housing (affordable and not) will be included, and the types of retail that is being targeted for the commercial space. Milchama 17:27, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Excellent graphic

Today I came across this graphic, which I thought ought to fit well on this page, but didn't see a good place in the text to hang it on. I'm sure we can get permission, but I don't see where it should go on this page. If an editor sees a good place to add it, leave a message on my talk page, and I'll see if I can get it licensed under the GFDL. Cheers, Vectro 16:52, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

It would be nice if that graphic also listed the count of residents rather than just percentages. If there are currently 50 low income people living there, probably paying over 50% of their income for housing, but after the project there will be 5,000 all paying only 30% of their income - then that reality would be far different than what that graphic is obviously trying to portray ("there are three types of lies...") 74.72.228.158 (talk) 14:26, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Major rewrite / split into multiple articles

I did a major rewrite of the article, but then immediately reverted it realizing how this is a very controversial project. You can see it here. The main points of the rewrite is to change the focus on the article from the public opinion surrounding the project to the actual project itself. I know that the opinions are an important part of the project, but should not be the bulk of the article. I made a new article, Atlantic Yards public opinion, to serve that purpose. I also made an additional article, Atlantic Terminal Urban Renewal Area, about the history of the area, before and during the Atlantic Yards plans were made public. I also think a Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn article should be made, as they have been a major driving force in the public opinion against the project. Looking forward to your opinions on how we should reshape the article. Milchama 05:41, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I think Atlantic Yards public opinion definitely has enough for its own article. But then I see statements like this from Brooklyn Nets Arena:

Supporters of the project often cite the promise that 50% of the 4,500 apartments will be low-income. A few days after announcing that figure, the number of apartments was raised to 7,300, and the definition of "moderate income" was set at $109,000 per year. The average income in Brooklyn is $35,000, and the number of apartments that will supposedly be available for residents who make less than that will be 900. Of those 900, many of them will not be on the main Atlanitc Yards site, thus segregating the new residents by income. City Councilmember Charles Barron has asserted that the project will be "instant gentrification.

...and I'm tempted to put it in the housing section of Atlantic Yards. That's part of the problem - a lot of the plan is still in flux, and public opinion may change with it. (It's easy to tell where my politics lie, ain't it?) Wl219 14:59, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

The opinion part of the Nets Arena article can be tackled next. The immediate item to be worked on is certainly this article since it lacked organization and intertwined fact and opinion. I switched it back to my rewrite, but feel free to continue discussion and changes. Milchama 16:37, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

The "major rewrite" removed much objective information. I have made some quick changes, but the differences need to be closely looked at to arrive at a complete, accurate, objective article. Tommyill 01:37, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

As the author of the rewrite, I appreciate your input. As I continue to stress, the article should be about the development, and not about controversy surrounding it. Please continue to make changes and add comments, as long as the article is about the Atlantic Yards, and not the Atlantic Yards Controversy. Milchama 15:31, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Comments from BrooklynWiki dated 12/26/06: I did a lot of work on this page, and I came back to it to find that it was basically rewritten by what looks to me like a publicist for the developer. The article now looks like an advertisement for the project. I am a partisan in this fight, and I admit that I think it should not be built, but I have tried to be fair, and the recent edits show no such concerns.

I did the rewrite, and my goal was not to make it look like an advertisement. In fact, I don't think it is. The article was very sloppy with little organization, with a very strong anti-development slant. The article is about the proposed development. It is not about a fight to keep it from happening (although that is one element of the story of the Atlantic Yards). I just edited it to clearly describe what Ratner plans on putting there, and what land is to be used, including the Vanderbilt Yards and the properties which they want to buy out or use emminent domain on. This article, as I continue to say is about the Atlantic Yards and not the Atlantic Yards Controversy. In the event that the Atlantic Yards isn't built, then the focus of the article could be more about the community groups that stopped it. The article should be about the facts, with opinion taking up only a small percentage of it. Milchama 16:42, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

It is incorrect to emphasize the 1/3 of the proposed site that is comprised of the railyards. This is consistent with the developer's misrepresentation of the neighborhood. It is more accurate to emphasize the remaining 2/3s of the project area. To overemphaize the smaller part sounds partisan, whether or not that is your intention. Even supporters of the project differ in their representation of the area. I've heard Bertha Lewis describe the area as gentrified and then Stuckey describe it as blighted. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.162.229.11 (talk • contribs) 20:37, 26 December 2006 (UTC).

I don't want to put the name and address of the condo pictured because there has been too much emphasis on this remaining resident's personality. There are other individuals and businesses that are suing the ESDC over their use of eminent domain, but this building is striking both because it was recently renovated (which I believe disproves the developer's argument that the area is blighted) and because the property would sit at center court of the proposed arena, assuming the developer wins the eminent domain case. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.162.229.11 (talk • contribs) 21:09, 26 December 2006 (UTC).

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a news service. If the person who lives there has been making a big deal about losing their building, that should be noted, otherwise, it shouldn't be mentioned at all. Also, proper citation is needed that the particular building, and not the yards is the site of the arena. Milchama 21:26, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Lawsuit section

The lawsuit section is too long, and merely a cut and paste of the legal argument. I think we should have a 1-2 paragraph summary, with a link to an external, neutral site (not DDDB), with the main details. Milchama 19:27, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

POV

Much of this article comes across as biased in favor of the project's opponents. I just removed 8 or so citations to a major opposition blog, which were used as references for this article in violation of WP:BLOGS, not to mention WP:NPOV. As others have stated on this talk page, there is a lot of material about the problems and controversy with this project, but not much about the details of the project itself. This appears to be a consequence of POV editing. Much of the controversy is indeed notable, and its discussion needs to stay. However, the language needs to be toned down in places, and equal attention should be given to the pro-construction side. Describing the features of the project in detail could fulfill some of this balancing function. DarwinPeacock (talk) 07:00, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

The problem is that it keeps changing. The initial proposal had no stadium to speak of and now it's only a stadium. The developer has expressed that it's not a public project so whatever he ultimately sees won't be revealed.--208.125.29.157 (talk) 23:40, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Pacific Park, Brooklyn. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121004031713/http://nymn.com:80/barclays-center-opens-in-brooklyn-with-jay-z-new-york-music-news/ to http://nymn.com/barclays-center-opens-in-brooklyn-with-jay-z-new-york-music-news/

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).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 12:10, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Matthew Brinkerhoff name spelling

The page says that a lawyer named Matthew Brinckerhoff is involved in a case about Pacific Park. The lawyer's name is actually spelled Matthew Brinckerhoff .

References