Talk:Washington, D.C./Archive 2

Population

Where are people getting these claims of 582,000? The Census Bureau reports 550,000 as of july 1, 2005. --JoSePh 25 July 2006 21:13

I added a reference for it [1]Kmusser 13:37, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Image:Pentagonfireball.jpg

I have removed Image:Pentagonfireball.jpg (Security camera image of the moment after American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon), as I think the article can do without it for the following reasons.

• The Pentagon is located in Arlington, Virginia and not in Washington.
• We can find a more appropriate image that depicts the security implications on people in Washington, such as the closing of Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House (done in response to the Oklahoma City bombing and not the September 11, 2001 attacks).

Recent history

I also think that too much space is devoted to recent history (2001 - present), in relation to history prior to 2001.

A word count shows:

• 1249 total words in the history section
• 674 words (53%) of the history section about recent history (2001 - present)

As time permits, I will do what I can to improve the balance for the various historical time periods in this article, as well as add some image that better reflects the impact of security measures on people in Washington.

--Aude 00:52, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

District of Columbia article?

Considering the amount of popular press, legal press, and American constitutional scrutiny that the District of Columbia as an adminstrative entity receives, I'm rather suprised that there is not a separate article on it rather than merely a redirect to this article. Has this been discussed to resolution previously, or is it merely a matter of not finding the right mix of authors to make the suggested article work? Thanks for the input. Courtland 14:23, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

At the current time, Washington, D.C. and District of Columbia are, more or less, the same thing. Somethings that should be gone over include the fact that the Distict used to comprise two counties (Washington County and Alexandria County), that there used to be two cities in the District (Washington and Georgetown, Georgetown being incorporated by the Maryland General Assembly prior to ceding), and the fact the government is known as the District of Columbia, and Washington, as a name, only continues through colloquial use. -James Howard (talk/web) 14:54, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Would we consider the city of Washington still in (and conterminous with) Washington County, D.C.? The county is listed as (none), yet the entry for Boston lists its county as Suffolk County, Massachusetts even though counties in Massachusetts have been basically abolished. I'll admit that it's much easier to find Suffolk County on a map, but it doesn't seem that lack of a discrete government is enough to say a county doesn't exist. - Afiler 04:19, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

There is no Washington County, DC really - Washington County, Washington City, and Georgetown, DC were basically merged in 1871 and 1895 to form Washington, DC. The Washington County, D.C. article has some more on this. If anything, it's moot, as there is no county government of any kind. Awiseman 21:09, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

IM pretty sure that the metro area is a lot higher in population than what this article has. I heard that the population of the metro area is at 5.9 million and almost at six million and when you combine it with the metro area of Baltimore which is very close to the DC metro, almost colliding with DCs metro, the population is at over 8 million.

I just added a sentence talking about the in-migration of many professionals from across the US and the resulting phenomenon of rarely meeting a locally born Washingtonian in some settings. Also an explanation of "cave dweller"--a unique local term and concept often cited in the local press but surprisingly not defined in many places, including this article.138.88.207.92 18:19, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Congress Representation

This is a current issue that is being debated in congress. It should be mentioned more.

Private Schools

The section of private schools is really lacking; its very incomplete, and should link to a seperate article about private DC high schools. I can add a lot to it - anyone agree? Tkessler 21:56, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Go for it, I went to one (obvious which, check my recent edit) and they need more love. --Golbez 22:29, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Agree. I'm not quite sure what you're thinking, but I think the topic of education can be greatly expanded into a separate article.

I don't know all the details or not yet sure how exactly to explain it, but there is a long history and controversy regarding education in DC. The quality (or at least perception) of DC public schools has been considered poor — particularly in the 1990s when the Control Board and Congress intervened and school facilities were shuttered due to fire code violations. The quality of DC schools contrasts particularly with the surrounding jurisdictions — Montgomery, Arlington, and Fairfax Counties — which are regarded as among the very best public school systems in the country. (Though Banneker is #46 in Newsweek's list of top high schools and Wilson is #318.)

The rather poor quality of DC public schools deters many middle-class families from living in DC, in favor of the suburban counties. Other families send their children to private school, if they can afford it. School vouchers and charter schools are yet more issues relating to education in DC. --Aude 22:40, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Map showing proximity to VA and MD

This article (and Geography of Washington, D.C. strongly needs a map showing the states of Virginia and Maryland, and where Washington, D.C. is situated between those two states. Without it, the context of where it's located is unclear to readers (even to many Americans) who would like to know exactly where it is located. The map of the entire U.S. makes the area too small, and the map of D.C. itself doesn't have the context of the neighboring states. Would anyone able to do make such a map? I don't have the graphics skills. Badagnani 23:07, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Might want to try this map Image:DC locator map.jpg. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 06:16, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

The map should somehow include both the national and regional map, with one an inset of the other. I'll work to come up with something that provides both levels of context. --Aude 14:41, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I've been working on a replacement for the quadrant map that doesn't just have the District surrounded by white space...I will upload it soon. Postdlf 18:33, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I hadn't thought of replacing the quadrant map, but agree that it definitely needs improvement. Thanks for working on that. I'll continue working on some locator map that combines the national and regional-scales. I might provide a few versions and seek feedback. Also, I will soon be able to supply some maps for Wikipedia for other DC-related topics and articles (transportation, demographics, landmarks, neighborhoods, etc.). For other (non-Wikipedia) uses, I have been compiling GIS data for Washington, D.C. and surrounding jurisdictions. Let me know if there's anything in particular that you think is needed. --Aude 22:58, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Great, thanks; if it can show the whole states (or at least a large portion of them), that would be the best, so that D.C.'s location vis-a-vis those states would be clear. This might necessitate a separate map, though, like the one described above: Image:DC locator map.jpg. Badagnani 21:11, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I added the state names to Aude's locator map and uploaded it to the article. Could it perhaps be added to the D.C. box, under the USA map? There's plenty of room to do so, with the table of contents taking up so much space. Badagnani 18:49, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Locator map

Thanks for adding the state names. I like it, with the names. Not sure I like it, but have tried to merge the state-level map and the usa map into one image (see right), for use in the infobox. I think it might be worth redoing this map from source map files, at better resolution. But, this might do for now.-Aude (talk | contribs) 19:19, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

The article should be amended to show how Virginia reclaimed the land from Washington, DC, in the 1850s that is now Arlington County. Prior to that transaction, the map of DC was a perfect Rhombus.˜˜˜

It does say that, under the History section. It was a perfect square, technically. Awiseman 14:56, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Washington, District of Columbia

Kmf164: Okay, here I am. Yes, I know that it is technically not a state, but I think the argument I made in my summary still stands: For every state in the union, as well as ever country article I have seen, above the box, it has the full name, in it's entirety. Puerto Rico isn't a state, but it has Commonwealth of Puerto Rico above the box. Same with Guam. I see this as only following suit, keeping everything the same way. Search4Lancer 00:22, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

I'll allow others to weigh in here. Though, "Washington, District of Columbia" sounds very strange to me. "Commonwealth of Puerto Rico" doesn't, nor does "State of Vermont". The debate about "Washington, D.C." vs. "District of Columbia" has been argued many times. I think it has to be one or the other, but not "Washington, District of Columbia", as nowhere ever is that the official or common name used. --Aude 00:46, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

The formal name for Washington, DC is simply the “District of Columbia”, not “Washington, District of Columbia”. (See DC Code § 1-102.)

— DLJessup (talk) 00:53, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

All this is simply the messiness caused by the coterminous nature of the city and the "district." Two articles would be entirely unnecessary, of course; but short of that no solution can ever be entirely logical. "District of Columbia" is the best title for the box, even if it doesn't agree with the article name, since as others note above "Washington, District of Columbia" is something nobody would ever say or write. Doops | talk 06:10, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Humm, after some research you're right DLJ, the formal name is District of Columbia, as per official documents on the official website (budget plans). Silly me, but I still say the box should be changed to it's formal name, which has been done already, thank you Doops. Search4Lancer 09:24, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

The box currently says "Washington, D.C."--when the last comment was written, did it say "District of Columbia"? Regardless, I think it should be changed to "District of Columbia." //MrD9 07:50, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Photos

I just uploaded a number of photos from the 2006 Cherry Blossoms. Gallery -- These photos primarily include the Tidal Basin, Washington Monument, Jefferson Memorial, FDR Memorial, and National Mall. If you have any specific requests for images, just leave a message on my Talk page I should be able to get those by mid-June. Provide as much detail as you can for what you are looking for in the image. --Thisisbossi 04:31, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I just reverted Skyfox11's addition of several photos — not that I don't like his photos, but because of too many photos in the article. I'm now thinking that some of the other photos in the article might not be the best, or in the appropriate sections. For example Image:Washington Monument cherry blossoms.jpg under "Climate" and "People and culture"? And apologies to Raul654, but I don't think Image:Jefferson memorial 1.jpg is the best photo of the Jefferson Memorial (too gloomy), yet alone the best to represent "Landmarks and museums". And why the "Lincoln Memorial" photo in the "Radio" section. Image:Washington DC Capitol11.jpg might be okay under Local government, if the caption mentioned something about Congressional oversight of the D.C. government.

And, no pictures for Education, or Transportation? I've seen many good photos of Washington Metro in Wikipedia (look at any of the List_of_Washington_Metro_stations). A good many more photos of Washington, D.C. are on commons. I suggest we review the choice of photos in this article and perhaps replace some with ones that are better quality and help illustrate the text. I don't want this to be a unilateral move, so I'm posing this first for thought and discussion here on talk. -Aude (talk | contribs) 03:24, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree but also want to especially object to the photo of the Capitol in the section titled "Local government". This is highly misleading. More appropriate would be a shot of the John A. Wilson Building or the Reeves Center or the mayor or almost anything else. --דוד ♣ D Monack 05:14, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Comments

I've done some work on Category:Washington, D.C. to copy PD/free-license photos there and categorize. Though, still some more work to do there, but from looking at what we have, I think there might be some more photos that we'd like someone to take (I'd be willing to help, as I think others might). The photos used in the article tend to focus on the touristy National Mall area and ignore the other Washington (the neighborhoods and people).

I suggest going through the list and

1. Comment on the exiting images (should we keep, as-is; move somewhere else in the article; replace with a similar, better image, ...)
2. Suggest images (existing on commons or suggest an idea that's not yet on commons/wikipedia)

Of course, in the end, there might be more suggestions than there is space here; though there are subtopic articles (e.g. History of Washington, D.C.) and we could have more subarticles if particular sections get too long. -Aude (talk | contribs) 17:28, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Existing photos in the article

Here's a list of images used:

• Intro
  • Image:WashMonument_WhiteHouse.jpg - aerial shot of Washington Monument, Ellipse, and White House
    • Undecided. It's neat that this is an aerial shot, but don't think it's the best photo of D.C. We should choose something more emblematic for this spot. -Aude (talk | contribs) 18:00, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Image:Map of usa highlighting dc.png - Locator map
    • Comment. I'm working on a replacement that shows the location of DC in a regional context (maybe with the national map as a subset map) -Aude (talk | contribs) 17:54, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
• History
  • Image:Karte_Washington_MKL1888.png - Historic map
    • Keep - This suits the purpose, relating to history. -Aude (talk | contribs) 17:54, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Image:Washington_dc_1874.jpg - Newspaper Row, 1874
    • Keep - This definitely suits the purpose, relating to history. -Aude (talk | contribs) 17:54, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Image:Largewashington.jpg - aerial shot, looking west over the U.S. Supreme Court, U.S. Capitol, and the National Mall.
    • Move or Delete - This doesn't relate to history, so either move elsewhere in the article or not use at all. -Aude (talk | contribs) 17:54, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
    • It's also inaccurate, as it is an old shot which doesn't include the National Museum of the American Indian, opened up in 2004. C4bl3Fl4m3 00:50, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
• Geography and climate
  • Geography
    • Image:DCQUADS.jpg - Quadrant map
      • Comment. Postdlf is working on a replacement for this map. -Aude (talk | contribs) 17:54, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
        • Here it is. Sorry about the wait. I still have it saved in layer form too, so let me know if you have any suggestions as to style changes. Postdlf 01:29, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I think the map looks great. Thanks. -Aude (talk | contribs) 01:35, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

• • • Other maps?
      • Comment/Suggestion. I am willing to make other maps for DC. Not yet sure what the theme of the maps should be or include? major roads/parks/landmarks/water? Maps might be better suited for Geography of Washington, D.C. -Aude (talk | contribs) 17:54, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Climate
• People and culture
  • Demographics
    • Image:Washington Monument cherry blossoms.jpg
      • Move or Delete. This doesn't relate to demographics, people, or culture. It also isn't the most aesthetic photo of the Washington Monument (or other landmarks); it lacks color/is too gray. I think the cherry blossoms would look nicer, when contrasted with a blue sky background, along with the tidal basin (water), and a major landmark (Jefferson Memorial or Washington Monument). -Aude (talk | contribs) 17:54, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
    • Also, has the historical populations table
  • Housing
    • Suggestion. I have begun writing up an article on Harry Wardman, who built a large portion of the rowhouses in D.C. I know the locations of some and plan to get some photos of them, for that article. A neighborhood picture, with rowhouses might be nice here (to show the neighborhoods, and common housing styles). -Aude (talk | contribs) 17:54, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Crime
    • Suggestion. While I'm not sure we need any photos of crime specifically. Though, gentrification is mentioned in the section and is certainly important for crime trends. *Maybe* here or in the subtopic article, could be a photo of an ungentrified part of D.C? I uploaded a couple photos of Anacostia, but have more that I could make available (of Anacostia, Shaw, and other neighborhoods). I also have photos of new, under construction condos that help illustrate gentrification. -Aude (talk | contribs) 17:54, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Landmarks and museums
    • Image:Jefferson_memorial_1.jpg
      • Delete and Replace. While the Jefferson Memorial is an appropriate subject for Landmarks, I've looked on Commons and see many better (less gloomy) photos of monuments and landmarks.
  • Media
    • Newspaper
      • Suggestion. An easy photo to get would be of newspaper boxes or newstand. -Aude (talk | contribs) 17:54, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
    • Television
    • Radio
      • Image:Lincoln_Memorial.jpg
        • Delete or Move. The Lincoln Memorial has nothing to do with radio. -Aude (talk | contribs) 17:54, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Performing arts
    • Suggestion. Maybe a nice picture of the Kennedy Center. -Aude (talk | contribs) 17:54, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Sports
    • Suggestion. A picture of the MCI center or RFK stadium. Though, when I go to a sporting event, I can try to get some good pictures of the game action. -Aude (talk | contribs) 17:54, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
• Economy
  • Image:Dept_of_Commerse.jpg - Department of Commerce building entrance
    • Delete. The Department of Commerce doesn't have much to do with the D.C. economy. -Aude (talk | contribs) 17:54, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
    • Suggestion. The DOC photo *might* work as an example of a federal office building (like where many Washingtonians work). If we want a picture of a Federal office building, I think we can do better. -Aude (talk | contribs) 17:54, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
    • Suggestion. Alternatively, private industry in D.C. is largely driven by Federal contracting and spending. It wouldn't be D.C., per se, but a picture of Rosslyn (with DOD-contractor logos on many buildings) might be suitable. -Aude (talk | contribs) 17:54, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
    • Suggestion. How about a picture of XM Radio's headquarters? Caption could read something like, "Washington is a major center for media and news, including the headquarters of XM Satellite Radio." --דוד ♣ D Monack
      • Comment. XM radio sounds good. It symbolizes not only media and the economy, but also their location at the NY Avenue Metro station — an area that DC is working to redevelop. -Aude (talk | contribs) 22:29, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
• Infrastructure
  • Government
    • Local government
      • Image:Washington_DC_Capitol11.jpg
        • Delete or Move. As commented above, this image gives the wrong impression of local governance. -Aude (talk | contribs) 17:54, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
    • Representation in federal government
      • Image:Dctaxationsample_small.jpg
        • Keep. This does a good job of illustrating local government, and the issues of representation in federal government. -Aude (talk | contribs) 17:54, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Education
    • Public schools
    • Private schools
    • Colleges and universities
      • Suggestion. A picture of Georgetown_University or another university. I uploaded one image of the Healy Center, though don't think it's the ideal picture (lighting less than ideal). I can try for a better photo, or maybe a photo of the campus from across the Potomac, or something else. -Aude (talk | contribs) 17:54, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Transportation
    • • Suggestion. The article opens discussion on Metro rail by mentioning when it first opened in 1976. The whole system as originally planned was finally completed in the late 1990s--the precise date and number of miles of rail would complete this part and make the original point about Metro bringing people back into the city. The short rail line that opened in 1976 just went a few miles within the district itself; it wasn't until the 1980s that line construction really started to reach out to the suburbs, and the 1990s before late-night and extensive weekend rail service allowed people to use it for entertainment/shopping forays into DC.205.188.116.136 12:31, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Aviation
    • Roads
    • Mass transit
      • Suggestion. There are many great photos of the Washington Metro on Wikipedia. I'm sure we can find a nice one to go here. -Aude (talk | contribs) 17:54, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Sister cities
  • References
  • See also
  • External links
    • {{Commons|Washington, D.C.|Washington, D.C.}}

See proposed move discussion at Talk:Washington

I propose that the Washington State article be moved from Washington to Washington (U.S. state) and that Washington (disambiguation) be moved and redirected to Washington. This would be in line with Lincoln and other similar precedents. Nothing personal against the state - it's a very beautiful place, but having Washington be a disambig would be the best way for readers and linkers to effectively navigate. "Washington" has a lot common of uses - as a person's name (including the first American president), as the name of a university, and of course as the name of Washington, DC. Outside the United States, "Washington" as a place name almost always refers to the U.S. capital. Even within the United states (with the exception of the northwestern U.S.), when someone says they're gonna "go to Washington," it's generally assumed that they mean Washington, D.C. Blackcats 01:29, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Here are 2 things to try:

1. Check Special:What links here/Washington
2. Do a Google search on Washington and check the first 500 results.

Georgia guy 01:31, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

The discussion should be kept at the one talk page. I will reply there. Blackcats 01:44, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Nickname of Big Chocolate

User:Joececchini is adding 'nicknames' I've never heard of to city articles, so reverted his addition of 'Big Chocolate to the nickname list, and want to see a reliable reference cited before allowing it back in. -- Dalbury^(Talk) 09:41, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Sounds vaguely racial to me. I'm white and lived in and around DC most of my life and I have never heard that name. Unlikely you'll find it cited, and even if cited, it's not notable enough. --Golbez 15:45, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Golbez, it seems like racial tone to the 'nickname'. And, as a native Washingtonian, I've never heard it. -Aude (talk | contribs) 15:53, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the responses. The nicknames he posted for cities I know didn't ring any bells, so I figured I'd better deal with all of them. -- Dalbury^(Talk) 19:58, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I just reverted an anon's edit, adding "Chocolate City" to the nicknames. I've never heard of this either. -Aude (talk | contribs) 22:29, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

I have heard "Chocolate City" many times. Its a reference to the majority black demographics in the city. See Chocolate City, a P-Funk album of the same name and "Reflections on Chocolate City" from the Washington Post. --דוד ♣ D Monack 22:37, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Sister cities

I will not get into a edit war with User:Danny Lilithborne, but I consider his removal of the Sister cities section without an explanation to be unwarranted. I will, however, listen to the opinions of the regular editors of this article. Some references I've found: for Beijing[2]; for Bangkok{http://203.155.220.239/en/02thebma/index.php?intContentTypeID=23&intListID=616&intContentID=834]; and for Dakar[3]. -- Dalbury^(Talk) 13:44, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

sister-cities.org - this should be all the proof that is needed. Jim62sch 14:21, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I had already edited the ref to point to that url. KillerChihuahua^?!? 14:26, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Is that sister cities list credible? In particular, is Putrajaya a sister city to DC? I'm asking because User:Aiman abmajid has been adding sister cities list section into articles on Malaysian cities and he has history of "adding his opinion", not fact. __earth ^(Talk) 02:56, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Irrelevant statement removed

I removed the sentence "Columbia was a part of Maryland, named after Christopher Columbus." from the article. I don't any relevance to the article. -- Dalbury^(Talk) 23:35, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

1952

Did you know that this place was involved in a major UFO incident in 1952 ? See UFO for more. Martial Law 09:31, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Infobox

I noticed the debate over use of infoboxes. Though, Template:US_City_infobox is being depreciated anyway, in favor of Template:Infobox City which includes the image as Derek prefers. Though, in working with this template, I had some problems with it (it fixes the size of the map to 300px, which works okay for D.C., but not other states such as New Jersey). To deal with that, I created Template:Infobox City mapsize with an added parameter "mapsize" that allows the mapsize to vary, as needed. -Aude (talk | contribs) 14:54, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

This looks good. I made a few modifications, mainly adding some information that has been left out (like the city motto). I also modified the total area and metro population figures, so that it's a bit easier to read and interpret. I tried adding the geographical coordinates (lat/long), though for some reason, it's still not showing up? Not sure what's going on there. Dr. Cash 18:17, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Geographic coordinates

I'll work more on the geog. coordinates later. There's always bugs to work out with new infoboxes. -Aude (talk | contribs) 18:19, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Problem solved. We should use the "latitude" and "longitude" parameters and not the geographic coordinate parameters. Also, I added the coordinates using decimal degrees, rather than DMS. Google Maps, Google Earth, and other GIS systems more often use decimal degrees. -Aude (talk | contribs) 18:48, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Looks good. Though shouldn't the coordinates be shown as a link using the coor dms template? 38°53′42″N 77°02′11″W Dr. Cash 18:51, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

We can use decimal degrees... http://kvaleberg.com/extensions/mapsources/index.php?params=38.8898341_N_-77.0088651_W_region:US. We should ensure the template can accomodate both ways of expressing coordinates, or have an alternative. -Aude (talk | contribs) 19:09, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Here's a hack for it: 38.8898341°N 77.0088651°W / 38.8898341; -77.0088651 -Aude (talk | contribs) 19:10, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

This link is already provided in the External links section. Maybe it doesn't need to also be in the infobox? Though, if you really want it there, I'm sure we can do it. -Aude (talk | contribs) 19:13, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

The coordinates I put in the infobox are those for the U.S. Capitol. This makes logical sense to me, since the axes bounding D.C.'s four quadrants radiate from the U.S. Capitol. It might not be the precise geographic center of Washington, D.C., but I think logic should prevail in this instance. Any thoughts? -Aude (talk | contribs) 20:28, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I see in the geography section, it says "38°53′42″N, 77°02′11″W (the coordinates of the Zero Milestone, on The Ellipse)". I still think the U.S. Capitol makes more sense to use for the coordinates, as it's the origin of D.C.'s quadrants and street network. Addressing in D.C. (also extending into Prince George's and Montgomery County, Maryland) is based on this system, -Aude (talk | contribs) 20:41, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

The Dinner

A Southern site for the new country's capital was agreed upon at a dinner between Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton. The initial plan for the "Federal City" was a diamond, ten miles wide on each side, totaling 100 square miles (260 square kilometers).

From what I remember from my reading of Joseph Ellis' Founding Brothers, the dinner was between Hamilton and Madison, hosted by Jefferson. I've made that correction and added Ellis as a source.--Osprey39 19:34, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Slavery

I removed the following from the intro to the article:

Slavery was practiced in Washington until 1862 and ended a few months before the Emancipation Proclamation took effect elsewhere in January 1863. Discovered records of payments (to slave holders, not to enslaved laborers) have established that the U.S. Capitol building also was constructed with the labor of enslaved Black American men.

"Commissioners' order for hiring slaves: At a meeting of the Commissioners at George Town on the thirteenth Day of April 1792: Present Thomas Johnson, David Stuart & Daniel Carroll Esq.The following resolve was made and a copy thereof handed to Capt. Williams. The Commissioners resolve that to hire good labouring negroes by the year, the masters cloathing them well and finding each a blanket, the Commissioners finding them provisions and paying twenty one pounds a year wages. The payment if desired to be made quarterly or half yearly. If the negroes absent themselves a week or more, such time to be deducted."

I have a couple reservations about these 2 paragraphs: 1) If they are to be included in the article, they should be in the history section and not the intro section 2) I didn't see a reference for this information. It seems to include quoted material, but I didn't see a citation of where that quote came from. 3) I'm not certain if this is relavant to the article regardless, but I have much less conviction of this than the prior two points. Treznor 01:14, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

An update: I've noticed the quote is on the Internet at geocities verbatim(www.geocities.com/bobarnebeck/swamp1800.html). However, this website also doesn't provide a cite that I can see (though I didn't spend an excessive amount of time looking). Treznor 01:18, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Virtual Tours of Washington, DC sites

I have compiled a vast, growing collection of virtual tours of Washington, DC museums, monuments, and restaurants. I would like to post it in the external links section. Yes, it does take Java to view the tours, but that is a fairly normal application on most people's computers. I have worked very hard to create these tours and I think they would be a great addition to the Washington, DC section. Please view them at Virtual Tours.I look forward to seeing if the majority of editors think the site should be included in the external links section. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.143.6.94 (talk • contribs) .

The QTVRs are few and of minimal informational content on what is largely a linkfarm site. But if you would like to contribute images or movies directly, please upload the files directly to Wikipedia and we'd be happy to have them without the filter of advertisements. Postdlf 03:46, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. They are actually .jpg images that run through a java applet. I would be happy to load them on to wikipedia, but I don't think I am able to. I am happy to host them on my website and give them to the wikipedia community. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.143.6.94 (talk • contribs) .

Anyone can upload jpegs to Wikipedia; just use the "upload file" link to the left and release them under the GFDL. Or do you mean you don't think you're able to because you don't own the rights to them? Postdlf 04:11, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

You forget that IPs can't upload. He has to create an account first. --Golbez 04:30, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

If they were just jpegs then I could upload them, yes, but they require the java program on my site to run the 360 degree virtual tour. If I just upload the jpeg it's a panoramic image, but not a moveable 360 degree tour. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.143.6.94 (talk • contribs) .

We could possibly make a section under Webcams for Virtual Tours, if the other editors are fine with that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.161.142.50 (talk • contribs)

• Please see Wikipedia's external links guidelines, where it discusses adding links to promote sites. It's particularly discouraged for site owners to add links to their own sites, as people will question the motives behind adding the links. It gives some (right or wrongly) the impression that the site owner is using Wikipedia to bring more traffic to their site and boost advertising income. I notice these dcguide links have been added to many other articles (e.g. Lincoln_Memorial, National_Museum_of_the_American_Indian, ...). I respect the amount of hard work that went into creating the virtual tours, but Wikipedia needs to adhere to it's Policies and guidelines and is not a link repository. Having to go cleanup external links sections takes away our time that we could otherwise be working on articles. -Aude (talk | contribs) 18:41, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

I definitely understand that wikipedia is not a link repository. However, I feel like the virtual tours provide a service worthy of being included in the Washington, DC section. Perhaps a single link made available to the public in the Washington, DC section could be allowed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.143.6.94 (talk • contribs)

• I see no problem in allowing one link on the Washington, DC site under "Virtual Tour of Washington, DC".--141.161.142.50 21:26, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
  • But, 141.161.142.50 (during the daytime) and 69.143.6.94 (during evenings) have both been adding many of these links on many other articles. Maybe if you had added just one link somewhere, it might have gone undetected. But going around to so many articles, adding links is something that sets off the spam radar. While your site isn't explicitly selling stuff, it seems to your benefit to attract traffic and generate advertising $. I have a strong personal dislike for such links. Now, if you would create an account and start contributing more substantively to Wikipedia, I wouldn't mind a link to your website on your user page. -Aude (talk | contribs) 21:43, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
    • Again, I welcome you to register an account and contribute to Wikipedia. I don't have problems with editors having links to their personal website on their user page. -Aude (talk | contribs) 22:44, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

• It is a contribution. The virtual tours add to the Washington, DC section and are a free service to its users.

The current external links include websites such as washington.org (which despite the .org has advertising on it) and dcpages.com , which is a link repository with advertising on it. How can we allow sites like these to be included, but not a virtual tour site like dcguide.com ?--141.161.142.50 21:52, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

• • .orgs are not required to have no income. Washington.org is also an official city site. DCPages.com is an iffy one, and if others agree, we could remove it. It's just a web directory and small forums, from what I can tell. However, if we remove dcpages for that reason, dcguide doesn't have a chance, since it has far less content, though is much prettier. --Golbez 22:19, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

• • What I mean by contributing, is helping to write articles, uploading photography to Wikipedia, etc. As for the other links you mention, washington.org is the official Washington, DC Convention and Tourism website. It is just linked from this article, and not a whole slew of other articles, and the link was added by a well-established editor who unlikely works for DC Convention and Tourism. As for the other site, dcpages.com, I actually agree that the amount of advertising there is too much, in proportion to the useful content so the link is now gone. My main objection here is about adding links to your own website. -Aude (talk | contribs) 22:42, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

• • Kmf164, my intention was not to have DCpages.com removed. I think it has some valuable content and is worth linking to as much as Dcguide.com has good virtual tour content and is worth linking to as well. As a photographer for DCguide.com I have the chance to take lots of pictures of Washington, DC which I am happy to post up on the Washington, DC article.

I know that for the most part there is a strict linking rule, but possibly sometimes the rules can be bended to allow valuable content. Of course, I leave this up to you to decide. I will continue building DCguide.com into a valuable resource and I will also add photos for consideration on the Washington, DC article. I am finished pleading my case and I leave this in your hands, Kmf164.--69.143.6.94 23:30, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Trivia

Where can I place this:" ==Trivia==

In 1952, Washington, D.C. was involved in a major UFO incident which resulted in the implementation of the Robertson Panel protocol by the CIA." ? Martial Law 22:47, 5 April 2006 (UTC) :)

In this incident, not only UFOs were seen by thousands, armed jets had chased the UFOs and were even chased by the UFOs. Martial Law 22:49, 5 April 2006 (UTC) :)

You should have a citation to back it up. Black and White^USER_TALK^CONTRIBS 21:57, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

This has been mentioned on the paranormal related radio talk shows, and written about in many books. I have a copy of one written by a ex-USAF Captain. Martial Law 20:40, 20 April 2006 (UTC) :)

The citation is this: Invasion Washington UFOs OVER THE CAPITOL by one Kevin D. Randle, Ph.D., Captain, U.S.A.F.R., ISBN 0380814706. Martial Law 20:46, 20 April 2006 (UTC) :)

That is one of many citations that others may also find. Martial Law 20:47, 20 April 2006 (UTC) :)

I think we should see the other "many" citations before such an extraordinary claim is put in the article. Postdlf 20:51, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

I'd rather not include a "trivia" section - period. Such sections, as also with "popular culture" sections [4] [5], tend to get out of hand, often with poorly referenced tidbits that people can't fit into the article prose, and detract from the quality of the article. My opinion is not specifically in reference to the particular bits of trivia inserted in this instance, but a broader opinion that applies here. See also Wikipedia_talk:Trivia for more opinions on the matter. -Aude (talk | contribs) 22:10, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Lists

There are many long lists of things in sentence form separated by commas. So much of this would look better with tables. I'm not so good at tables, so maybe someone can devote some time to this? Civil Engineer III 13:20, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Myths

Think it might be useful to cover several myths about Washington DC. Like the lack of J street, or that it is rumored to be built on a swamp, etc --Gidge 20:32, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

What makes you think these are myths? Both are at least partly true. See Streets and highways of Washington, D.C. and Geography of Washington, D.C. --dm ^(talk) 20:52, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

It has always been my understanding that, at the time that Washington streets were laid out, the letters "I" and "J" were still interchangeable in the English language. Also, there is a Jay Street in Washington; we lived there when I was born. It is given as the address on my birth certificate. It is in Northeast Washington, in the Anacostia neighborhood.Carlaclaws 22:36, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Climate

The article has recently been edited to include the following:

Washington has a temperate climate typical of the southeastern U.S., with four distinct seasons.

What exactly is a "climate typical of the southeastern U.S."? The Southeast is a pretty big place with diverse climates. A quick glance at the map of USDA plant hardiness zones shows that. Doctor Whom 15:15, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

That's fairly accurate, I didn't make the edit but the generalization is presumably based on Koppen map, codes which is the most commonly used climate classification system. Kmusser 16:04, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

From that map, it looks as though the DC area is split between two climate classes, one of which is not southeastern, and the other of which is broadly defined enough that it also takes in most of Florida. I believe that the generalization as it stands is more likely to give the reader an inaccurate impression than to convey useful information, and the Köppen system doesn't convince me otherwise. Doctor Whom 23:41, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

The DC metro area is split. It is hard to tell on that map, but the line runs along the Appalachian foothils dividing areas that have severe winters from those that don't. DC itself is definitely on the SE side. Whether that's useful information? *shrug* I just wanted to add where it came from. Kmusser 13:16, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

I think the climate more accurately resembles the climates of Baltimore, Philadelphia, and New York rather than the southeast. Summers are similar to those in the south, but in the winter, significant snowfall is much more common than it is in the south (Richmond, Norfolk, Raleigh, Charlotte, Charleston,SC, Atlanta, and places where snow is extremely rare). Many major east coast storms that affected the East Coast cities also included DC. Such include the Blizzard of 2006, Blizzard of 2003, Blizzard of 1996, Veterans' Day storm, Blizzard of 1983, and many smaller, nonhistorical storms. I think it is more accurate to consider this climate typical of the Mid-Atlantic States or East coast cities.

Famous houses

I think the famous houses section should be deleted. I've never heard of that house, and there are hundreds, if not thousands, of famous houses in DC. --Awiseman 18:51, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I just removed it. There's certainly a place for documenting underground railroad locations, but one such house is certainly not an important DC topic, and certainly not something that the city is "famous for," as it claimed. Postdlf 18:53, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, there is one famous house in DC that probably should be mentioned,... ;-) Dr. Cash 22:06, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Image:American University.jpg

I have removed the image because is clearly a screenshot of copyrighted Google Maps images. On top of that, the layout of the page was clearly disarranged. David 21:05, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

"Retroceded"

Quote from article: "However, the area south of the Potomac River (39 square miles or about 100 km²) was returned, or "retroceded", to Virginia in 1847 and now is incorporated into Arlington County and the City of Alexandria." Just becasue retrocession is a word, doesn't mean retroceded is. Any thoughts on just removing the ", or retroceded," part? Lunch with Jason 18:57, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

"Retroceded" is a word (source). Doctor Whom 18:03, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Washington, DC & District of Columbia the Same

Just to put my two cents in. According to my World Book Encyclopedia, the District contains only the city of Washington. Therefore, they are the same.

Washington, DC, Not D.C.

The name of this article should be changed to Washington, DC. "DC" is a postal abbreviation. Postal abbreviations do not have periods. It's grammatically incorrect to refer to the District of Columbia as "D.C." Anyone care to comment?Politician818 04:58, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Why would you want to use the postal abbreviation? AP Style, the style used by most newspapers, is "Washington, D.C." If you ask the U.S. Post Office, they would like you to address your mail to "WASHINGTON DC". That is: all caps and no punctuation at all. In short, the post office is crazy and we shouldn't want to copy them. --dm ^(talk) 16:09, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

AP Style is not correct. The press makes mistakes all the time; it's not grammatically correct just because newspapers refer to the District as D.C. The postal abbreviation is the only grammatically acceptable abbreviation for a state, federal district, or territory. For example, abbreviating California as Ca or Ca. is incorrect. I don't really get your statement that the Post Office is "crazy" either. In conclusion, it's not an issue of "why do I want to use the postal abbreviation?" but rather that that's the only abbreviation that exists. Wikipedia should seriously think about changing the title of the article, as good grammar will only make Wikipedia look more respectable.Politician818 11:01, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

The 2-letter postal codes are a relatively recent phenomenon (dating to the 1960s, I think) introduced by the USPS to ease machine reading of envelopes. There were already a set of abbreviations in wide use for over 150 years in many cases. Among these: N.J. for New Jersey, Fla. for Florida, and D.C. for District of Columbia. Even the USPS doesn't use their 2-letter codes all the time. I found this on their website:

Did You Know?

When the million-dollar Hope Diamond was donated to the Smithsonian Institution, it was mailed from New York City to Washington, D.C., in a brown paper parcel.

Of course, the USPS is not crazy. That was hyperbole. They have their own logic behind disliking punctuation. Nevertheless, the USPS is not some grammar authority. Most reputable authorities, including virtually every English-language newspaper, write "Washington, D.C." I think it is incorrect to call the AP Styleguide a "mistake". One can disagree with their decision, but their decision was deliberate, not haphazard. I oppose changing the article until someone can explain to me why the USPS is more authoritative than AP. --dm ^(talk) 02:39, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

20+ years ago the traditional/wire service abbreviations reigned supreme but with electronic age standardization these have largely fallen by the wayside. The USPS abbreviations are not only used by the USPS but by most other large organizations. Although not "grammatically incorrect," Ala., Penna., and Conn. are now seen much less than AL, PA, and CT. Of course, Wikipedia naming conventions say this article should be Washington, Columbia. - AjaxSmack 05:41, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

The page you cite says U.S. cities should be named "city, state". D.C. is not a state so it doesn't fit into the regular template. In that case we should fall back on the rule of Wikipedia:Naming conventions which states "Generally, article naming should give priority to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize." I haven't done any survey, but it seems that "Washington, D.C." (or Washington, DC) is much better known than "District of Columbia". That's true among Americans, but even more true among English speakers elsewhere. The "District of Columbia" is the official legal title of the gov't entity, but we should go by actual usage and not be bound by legalisms. That's why the article on the British capital is called simply London, not its official name "City of London", and the French capital is Paris, not "Ville de Paris". --dm ^(talk) 04:46, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

We're writing an encyclopedia article, not mailing a letter. thx1138 09:03, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

As a resident of Washington, DC, here's my suggestion: why use any abbreviation at all? The title of the article should be District of Columbia. "Washington, DC" and "Washington, D.C." should both redirect to District of Columbia (with a link from the disambiguation page for an unspecified "Washington"). Although the city of Washington and the District of Columbia are coincident, this was not always true so a case could be made to have separate articles for the city and the District, although it's probably easier to keep them together. BTW I just checked a couple of other city articles and they are Baltimore, Maryland and Montgomery, Alabama (not Baltimore, MD and Montgomery, AL. I suspect people say "Washington, DC" primarily to distinguish us from Washington state, but there technically is no entity named "Washington, DC", but rather a city named Washington in a federal district named District of Columbia; they simply happen to have the exact same boundaries. MrDarwin 00:16, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

There is no active legal entity of "Washington," only the "District of Columbia." But did the DC Organic Law et al. unincorporate Washington or is it merely an inactive entity? -AjaxSmack 19:35, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Columbia is the federal district, Washington is just the city. In my opinion, the district is more powerful and prominent than the city. According to the original text in the Twenty-third Amendment to the United States Constitution, the terms "City of Washington" and the "District of Columbia" are used. The "City of Washington" is where the session of Congress was held, but the 3 electoral votes were given to the "District of Columbia"... well, at the place of issuing powers, it is just called "The District constituting the seat of Government of the United States".. I guess they allowed for a name change of the district. Nowhere can I find "Washington, DC" or "Washington, D.C."; those are just slang titles to distinguish between the district and the state of Washington. All of this is covered in the article. Abbreviations and common language do not usually pull more weight than official terms, but there are exceptions. Furthermore, the District of Columbia used to encompass what is today Alexandria, Virginia and Arlington, Virginia. Therefore, to ensure historical prominence of the larger DC, I believe this article should remain as the "District of Columbia" with redirects from Washington, DC... etc. --TinMan 04:20, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Nowhere in the Constitution does it say "District of Columbia" or "Washington". Both Article I Sec. 8 and the 23rd Amendment merely say "District", leaving it unnamed. --dm ^(talk) 04:55, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I have always used and most frequently see “Washington, DC” without periods. The Official DC website writes it this way: [6],[7], as well as just writing “DC” without periods (another example). Dar-Ape 21:46, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Politics

I find it somewhat ironic not to have a section on DC politics. Btyner 15:31, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

What do you mean? It has the Local government section. --dm ^(talk) 16:12, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

For example, unlike most other US political division articles, there is no mention of either recent or even historical voting trends. Btyner 17:26, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

LAW

What is the status of criminal law in Washington, DC? Are all crimes within the jurisdiction federal crimes? OneVeryBadMan 13:45, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

>DC has its own municipal code, so not all crimes are Federal crimes. The location of a crime scene largely determines whether the crime is prosecuted in Federal court or in DC court. This can be really tricky to dtermine, as there is so much Federal property in DC. For instance, misdemeanors committed on the sidewalk in front of the White House or the National Mall are within the jurisdiction of the U.S. Park Police and prosecuted in Federal District Court. Misdemeanors committed on Pennsylvania Avenue, 15th St, 16th, H St, Constitution etc are under the jurisdiction of DC Metro Police and prosecuted in DC Court. And of course crimes like kidnapping for ransom, bank robbery, etc. are always federal crimes.

Of coruse, I don't have citations for any of this, so I haven't put any of this on the page! Just personal experience.

Circles

List of Circles in Washington, D.C. has a great number of red links. If anyone is interested, this would be a good place to extend wikipedia's coverage of DC.--Niro5 02:25, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Columbus/Historical Columbia

DMonack makes a good point about how the city was named - should that link go to Christopher Columbus or Historical Columbia? --Awiseman 20:08, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Here's what I wrote on Awiseman's talk page: "Columbia has its origin in Christopher Columbus but the meaning is very different. Just as you wouldn't say Indiana is named after India because there is a step in between the two. D.C. was given that name because at the time Columbia was a formal, poetic name for the United States. There was no attempt to honor Christopher Columbus who never set foot in the land that would become the U.S.A. Columbus only really became a national hero in the 20th century after some lobbying by Italian immigrants."

Another analogy: we wouldn't say that Washington is named after Washington, Tyne and Wear either. --dm ^(talk) 21:44, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Location?

Someone has added a "Location" header with the following information - Location Washington D.C. is NOT part of the United States of America because it is not an actual state. It is located above Virginia and below Maryland. - Something seems odd about this. Of course it is not a state so the above is technically true, but to say it is not a part of the United States seem to be straining a point. Opinions? rhmoore 03:16, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I reverted it out. Not every part of the United States of America is a state. D.C. is part of the USA, as are American Samoa, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, etc. --dm ^(talk) 03:32, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually they aren't. They are unincorporated territories, i.e. they are not incorporated in to the United States. The District of Columbia is a federal district, simply a plot of land under the direct control of the U.S. Congress, which is part of no state. --Golbez 05:53, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Citizens of Washington, D.C. are treated differently in terms of voting rights, but in other respects (e.g. paying taxes) the same as states. --Aude (talk contribs) 06:01, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, because federal law applies to them just as much as it does to people of the states. --Golbez 06:14, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

That's a joke from the Colbert Report. It's false. --Awiseman 21:29, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Er? Which part? I still had to pay income tax there. :P Was it a joke about taxation without representation? --Golbez 22:00, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

"Location Washington D.C. is NOT part of the United States of America because it is not an actual state" is from the Colbert Report - he had segment where he interviewed DC's congressional rep, Eleanor Holmes Norton, and he said lots of silly stuff like that to make her angry. It worked! --Awiseman 22:14, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, heh, you didn't mean my comment. I'm sad I missed that, I've never really seen her mad. :P --Golbez 22:36, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

It should be on Youtube I bet. --Awiseman 23:10, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Multi-Media Virtual Tour, Washington DC

Hello - I am involved in a project called TourPath. We are creating multi-media, virtual, tours of cities, counties, communities in the U.S. (mutli-media including music, text, links, photos). I read through the previous posts regarding virtual tours, and have read Wiki's guidelines. I don't believe a link to the DC TourPath tour would violate Wiki's link rules, but I am writing to ask contributors if they would consider/review a link to the DC tour that I produced for TourPath:

http://www.commercialnet.biz/dvt/rmp.php?id=666

These tours do have a section for advertisements, but the content is not driven by the ads - the content is built around the facts (for each community)much like Wiki. If you have questions or would like additional information, I'm happy to respond.

Thank you for considering my request. Great job with DC-Wiki!

--Kim Simpson 22:51, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Area in Metric?

I don't know how to change this, but someone needs to. The areas are listed in metric. It is not appropriate for American cities to have their primary physical dimensions listed as metric. Please use the standard convention. (unsigned comment)

All metric measurements are translated into U.S. units. Why is this a problem? --dm ^(talk) 23:13, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Infobox accessibility issue

Just an explanation - I've changed the infobox "leader" parameters so that there aren't "matching" rows defined with HTML breaks (br). This makes the label/value pairs not "line up" for non-visual browsers as are used by blind people. What happens is screen readers present the content top to bottom, row by row, cell by cell, so the old content was heard as "Mayor city council chairperson ward 1 ward 2 ..., Linda W. Cropp, Jim Graham, ...". -- Rick Block (talk) 23:23, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Straw poll on intro

There apparently is some disagreement as to what the intro paragraph to this article should look like.

The original intro read as follows:

Washington, D.C. is the capital city of the United States. "D.C." stands for the District of Columbia, the federal district coextensive with the city of Washington. The city is named after George Washington, military leader of the American Revolution and the first President of the United States.

The new intro (three times replaced by User:Gardez Bien to the present form) reads as follows:

Washington, D.C. is the capital city of the United States. "D.C." stands for the District of Columbia, the federal district coextensive with the city of Washington. The city is named after George Washington, military leader of the American Revolution and the first President of the United States.The land was donated by the State of Maryland (out of the territories of Montgomery County, Maryland and Prince George's County, Maryland).

To avoid a revert war, please cast your vote as to which you would prefer (original or new).

Original: The intro should reflect what a reader unfamiliar with the District will want to see. The fact that part of two Maryland counties were ceded to become the District of Columbia is by no means the most important thing about the city. This information is useful but doesn't belong in the opening. If anything, this sentence should be more broadly worded to define Washington's geography (e.g., "The city is located on the banks of the Potomac River between the states of Maryland and Virginia") Also, please see this user's recent contributions, as he's been editing at least three other articles (Maryland, Prince George's County, Maryland, Montgomery County, Maryland) to include the DC-sourcing fact in their introductions, some as the first sentence of the article (though several have been reverted) Jkatzen 05:15, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Original:, for same reasons as Jkatzen. Also, mentioning Maryland as the land donor is incomplete without mentioning that Virginia was also a donor. Only that land was given back... And this is all unnecessary to get into in the intro. Postdlf 15:43, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Original per Jkatzen. While the information about the cession of land by Maryland is useful, it is not on the short list of the most salient facts about the District for someone who is reading the article to learn about it. Then again, whatever we do, we should not include anything in the introductory paragraph about cession by Virginia, since that is a historical side issue to a historical side issue. Doctor Whom 17:30, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Original, we have a history section, use it. --Golbez 19:31, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

The only one who seems to have a real problem with this is Jkatzen because he has a bias towards Virginia as well as Golbez and other "deep south" proponents. It has sat there without a change and even others have added to it. If the mods have not removed it for being POV then it can stay. The intro is suppose to be a summary listing important past,present and future facts. How is where the land came from not important?

If you feel it belongs in the history section then you should remove the following sentence as well "The city is named after George Washington, military leader of the American Revolution and the first President of the United States". It is actually current information because if it were to retrocede it would go back to Maryland, a bill was even proposed by Newt Gingrich to give the land back to Maryland, so it is very important info. I think the real question is why it gets on your nerves so much?--Gardez Bien 11:26, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I have no idea what you're talking about with your confused "deep south" rambling, but any attempts by you to flout consensus, as THE SOLE PERSON SUPPORTING THE TEXT HERE, will be reverted. Cheers, Postdlf 14:19, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Apparently, by living most of my life in Washington and living in North Carolina (deep south?), I'm not qualified to make a statement. (PS, I'm in Chantilly at the moment on business, woopwoop) The question is, why does it get on YOUR nerves so much that you feel the need to insult us? --Golbez 17:59, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Md. & Va. in Economy section

Why are companies based in Maryland & Virginia discussed in this article's Economy section? The already exist articles for Virginia & Maryland and all of the towns and cities where these companies are located. There is also Baltimore-Washington Metropolitan Area which could use a section on the regional economy. This article is pretty long so I don't think it makes sense to talk about anything but Washington, D.C. Does anyone object to me removing info about Maryland & Virginia companies? —dm ^(talk) 02:49, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

No, that makes sense. I'd recommend moving it to the metro-area article you mentioned. Jkatzen 19:26, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

I tend to agree. One way in which it could be relevant is if it provided jobs for D.C. residents, but because of the higher cost of living I don't think many people live in the District and commute to work in the suburbs. Postdlf 19:32, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

This article needs work, putting such lists (if relevant) into prose form and better use of references. I agree that this particular list is better suited for the region article and not here. What's missing is discussion of how economic statistics (e.g. unemployment) vary across the city, ranging from 1.5% in Ward 3 (upper Northwest) to 16.3% in Ward 8 (east of the Anacostia) [8]. --Aude (talk) 20:46, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. I have now rewritten the section changing the lists to prose and deleting the info about Md. & Va. Most of what was taken out is now in Baltimore-Washington Metropolitan Area. This section still could be fleshed out but I think it's on the right track now. —dm ^(talk) 03:10, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

what about National Geographic?

Doing a "Find" command on the article's and this forum page, I haven't been able to locate any reference to the fact that D.C. is also home to the National Geographic Society (and of course the National Geographic Channel). Considering the size (3 buildings which take up a whole city block in downtown DC) and incredible historic distinction of this organization, I don't think it would hurt to include this in the article.

DC- Originally 100 Sq miles???

I have noticed that Arlington County, VA matches perfectly the 10 miles by 10 miles demension of DC. Was this part originally planned to also be part of DC?

Yes, the VA side (ei Arlington) was taken back through Retrocession.

136.165.88.21 14:53, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Black Majority?

I noticed that DC's black population is tanking, while every other race is growing. Looks like by 2015 blacks will be less than 50% This seems odd because most US cities suffer from white flight, not black flight. Any comments? 136.165.88.21 14:53, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

While I have absolutely no data to support this, I suspect that the "black flight" is a result of the redevelopment of a number of poorer communities into upper-class developments. Much of the poorer population -- which is predominantly black -- is thus being forced into the neighboring areas that provide more affordable accomodations. I suspect that the demographics of adjacent Prince George's County, Maryland will show a related increase in black population. --Thisisbossi 15:13, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Site Location

who picked the site to be the capitol which is called Washington D.C. today?

I belive it was George Washington, he was a surveyor and he lived just south of here. I'm not totally sure however.--Niro5 17:20, 8 December 2006 (UTC)