Wikipedia

Talk:Detroit Fire Department

Latest comment: 7 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified
Learn more about this page

Budget Cuts section

edit
Latest comment: 9 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion

My edits have been reverted so to prevent edit warring I am opening a discussion here. The Detroit_Fire_Department#Budget cuts section as well as the Closed/disbanded fire companies section of the page directly violate WP:NOTSTATSBOOK, WP:UNSOURCED and WP:FIRE-NOT. I would like to hear what others have to say on the matter. This is just a long list of stations that no longer exist. There is no reason to have them there. --Zackmann08 (talk) 05:38, 1 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

A quick Google news search turned up at least 15 hits on the first page alone for DFD Brown outs. So much for unsourced. As far as WP:NOT goes, I do not see how it applies. It can be written much better and should have more referenced prose, but the decline of the city and the decline of its budget causing further decline in the city is a very valid subtopic for any article pertaining to the government of Detroit.
And now that I've looked at WP:FIRE, I see where you got the idea that WP:NOT somehow applies. FIRE is a guideline written by a very small Wikiproject. Wikiprojects do not set policy. NOT applying to this situation represents no more than the authors' of that guideline opinion. It does not represent a consensus of either the community or the editors on any page.
That being said, I think I shall wait to hear what the other editors here have to say before expressing any position on what we should have for content in this section. John from Idegon (talk)
I think there is an interesting point here. The WP:FIRE-NOT essay was written to address the practice of creating long lists of all the engine companies that have been disbanded over the history of the department. This would be somewhat equivalent to going to a sports team's page and seeing a list of all the players who ever played for the team, rather than just the current roster. BUT, Detroit is unique in that the recent decline in the city has led to massive budget cuts and downsizing of the department. My personal objection, and my reason for the edit in the first place, is that a long list of all stations that were closed constitutes a stats book. I think there is valuable information here, but just listing the stations that were closed is not it. My new proposal would be to redo this section as follows....
  1. Move the section up to be under the History heading 2 as a heading 3 of something along the lines of 'Budget Cuts' or '2010 Budget Cuts' (I'm not certain if 2010 is the right year, just spit balling ideas here...)
  2. Remove the long and verbose list of stations.
  3. Replace this list with a couple of well documented paragraphs about the budget cuts. Give stats without a long list. So instead of saying "Engine 2, which was organized at Hastings & Larned was disbanded at Hastings & Larned... Engine 4 which was...." Say something like "In 2010 the legislature passed a new round of budget cuts which closed 12 additional fire stations. This included the station of Engine 2, one of the oldest in the department." (To be clear the info I just listed there is made up off the top of my head. This is just a for example.
--Zackmann08 (talk) 18:02, 1 June 2015 (UTC)Reply
It should be elaborated on, but many encyclopedias have exactly this kind of information (I can show you the paper set on my wall!) so this information does qualify as 'encyclopedic'. It is not just a list of fire crews, but matches the history of Detroit. The rise and fall is all visible within the various time lines of the fire companies. Therefore it provides far more information than a simple 'list', but contributes to the history of Detroit and it's fire service. Which, considering the current narrative, is becoming one of the more fabled fire departments in the country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.234.35.6 (talk) 05:55, 5 June 2015 (UTC)Reply
Doesn't change the fact that it is still just a lengthy stat list that has no place in an article. Create a list page for it then. --Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 16:57, 25 June 2015 (UTC)Reply
The apparent reason for keeping this long list is that it shows the rise and decline of the department based on budget cuts. This list does not demonstrate that for various reasons. It is not in chronological order for one thing. Additionally it gives no indication as to what departments companies were closed for budgetary reasons vs other reasons. This is a clear list of stats or directory of stations that no longer exist. This adds nothing to the article except for clutter. --Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 17:58, 25 June 2015 (UTC)Reply
  • Remove. I think WP:INDISCRIMINATE applies here. Wikipedia does not catalog every single thing that has ever happened. That's what blogs are for. This could easily be summarized into a single sentence, such as "<number> fire stations have been closed since <year>." This would need to be sourced, of course. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:27, 26 June 2015 (UTC)Reply
edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Detroit Fire Department. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:32, 29 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Detroit Fire Department. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:35, 9 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Detroit_Fire_Department&oldid=1201482099"