Talk:Memphis, Tennessee/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Older comments

I changed the climate section to reflect the more insane nature of the weather in Memphis, which I believe every person who wants to move or visit should know about before hand. Also removed the description of the climate as humid subtropical, which is a myth spread by 1980s social studies books, and misleading to gardners. I know it's damn hot most of the year, but those sneaky winters are enough to prevent it from being subtropical, as is evident in the natural vegetation of the area, which is strictly temperate deciduous. Officially, a subtropical climate cannot freeze regularly.

I removed:

Burke's Book Store - Found at 1719 Poplar and Evergreen, this dog friendly, cozy store is staffed by a small, yet knowledgeable group of people. If you can’t find what you are looking for, someone would be happy to order it for you or redirect you to a better source. But, it is hard to leave empty handed with the store’s quirky selection of comics to civil war biographies.

The Wall of Graffiti at the Wild Things/Inz and Outz - 553 South Cooper St. The two stores are a gay/lesbian/straight friendly store and a neo-hippie paraphernalia store respectively. But, it is the wall along the parking lot that always provides plenty of aesthetic stimulation. One of the few places in Memphis to find vibrant graffiti, it never stagnates. Fresh images are added often.

Because it does not adhere to a NPOV. I don't think a listing of interesting places to visit in Memphis is a bad thing, but this is not the way to do it. It should be explained why these places are listed (i.e. biggest book store in Memphis, oldest whatever in the area, etc). This reads like advertising and shouldn't be here. Tuf-Kat 06:44, Dec 4, 2003 (UTC)

True, perhaps it should be put under Tourism. It does seem like advertising, yet huge cities such as New York advertise sites that run the gamut from stores to museums to parks. Just 'cause it has the same status as F.A.O. Shwartz doesn't mean it shouldn't be mentioned if it is relevant to the city. I must mention that I just discovered this site yesterday, so am still learning protocol. - Unifex

No problem, as it's not a big mistake. The issue is simply that this is one person's opinion and could be totally idiosyncratic. For example, I may believe that Burke's

• Employs large numbers of people
• The aforementioned people are not knowledgeable
• And are rude and unhelpful as well
• It's easy to leave the store without buying anything
• Because they have a limited selection

Neither your opinion nor my hypothetical one are verifiable. It can't even be proven that you really feel this way (you could be working for these companies). In any case, opinions like this need to be attributed to the people who believe them, and who must themselves be notable in some way (i.e. probably not you and definitely not I). Perhaps the Memphis Chamber of Commerce or tourism board maintains a list of interesting sites to visit, for example, or maybe a couple places are mentioned in most travel guides, or appeared on Insomniac with Dave Attell or something. These would be valid inclusions, but your (or my) opinions on the subject are not noteworthy or encyclopedic. Tuf-Kat 07:00, Dec 4, 2003 (UTC)

The Arts

I removed Isaac Hayes as he was mentioned twice in the same paragraph. Kenrus

==I deleted "Wiliiam Faulkner wrote most of his literary works in Oxford, Mississippi. Alex Haley, author of Autobiography of Malcolm X and Roots was from Henning, Tennessee." While of interest in other articles, these statements do not pertain to Memphis.--Boodro 13:08, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Shelby Farms

Why is there nothing mentioned about this massive park and the dont split shelby farms movement. I think we need some sort of statement about that park and/or a whole new article on the park. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Barcode (talk • contribs) .

• I agree, there certainly needs to be something on Wikipedia about Shelby Farms. Not that I'm an expert on the subject, but I think it must be extremely rare for a large city to have a such a massive greenspace within its borders. I would be fine with either an article devoted exclusively to Shelby Farms, an explanation of what it is in this article, or both. - Jersyko talk 23:35, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

• • Shelby Farms is actually (IIRC) the second largest urban park in the US, after Central Park in NYC... I figure that warrants a mention in the Wikipedia page.Kevinlipe 07:37, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

the article has been done. however it is the largest urban park. central park in NYC is 843 acres where as Shelby farms is around 4,500 acres. you can find the article at Shelby Farms, in fact on their website it says " At approximately 4500 acres it is five times larger than New York City's famed Central Park". Barcode 15:30, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Shelby Farms is not within the borders of Memphis, and I have a little trouble considering it an urban park; it's certainly not an urban park in the same sense that Central Park in New York and the lakefront parks in Chicago are. In fact, it's just outside the Memphis ring-road; I would call it a suburban park. I think it would be more accurate to state that it's located just outside the eastern edge of the city. No, I just got a city map; it's almost inside the city, in that there's part of the city to the east of it (see the map of Memphis at the Shelby County site.) However, it's not a Memphis park, it's a Shelby County park. (You can easily verify that by looking up Memphis parks and Shelby County parks; it's clearly county.) This relates to the sprawl that is Memphis. When I moved there in 1954, the Parkways were the city boundary to all intents and purposes (midtown is just inside that boundary). When I left in the early 1970's, I don't think 240 had been built, but where it now is would have been mostly rural but also suburban. Today, most of Memphis is much like the suburbs of New Jersey - just one neighborhood after another of commuters and shopping malls. Ngriffeth 17:48, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

• No, sorry, but Shelby Farms is indeed inside the borders of Memphis and it is governed by the Memphis City government. The map at the Shelby county site is slightly unclear, however I assure you that this is in fact the case. Find a better map, would be my advice. Whether you consider it "urban" or not is a judgment call, but rest quite assured that Shelby Farms is inside the borders of the city of Memphis. The city of Memphis and Shelby county do, however, share funding for maintaining the park. I'll grant you that. Otto42 22:29, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

• • I agree that it's inside in the sense that there are borders of Memphis most of the way around it; however, I don't believe that it's actually in Memphis, but I could be wrong. My belief is based on the fact that Memphis doesn't list it as a city park, while Shelby County lists it as a county park, on their respective Web pages. Anyway, it's easy enough to establish whether it's urban; the Census Bureau defines urban as areas having more than 1000 people per square mile, and since Shelby Farms is just north of Germantown, the density of Germantown would serve nicely to estimate the population density around Shelby Farms. If you don't think that's good enough, we could probably also check the densities of surrounding zip codes. Also, to call it the largest urban park just because it's bigger than Central Park, well... there are lots of big parks in cities less densely populated than NYC, parks that may themselves claim to be the largest urban park. Are you sure Shelby Farms is larger than any of those? Ngriffeth 16:46, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Just looked at Philadelphia parks on a hunch, Fairmount Park in Philadelphia claims 9200 acres. Ngriffeth 16:49, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

• • • Fine. You want proof? Here's an official site with high resolution maps from the Tennessee DOT: http://www.tdot.state.tn.us/Maps/city/#L-M . You will note on the "Memphis SE" map that the area of Shelby Farms has, in big letters, "Memphis" labeled on top of it. The city boundary is marked by a dashed line (refer to the map key at the bottom for an example) and it comes up and follows the Wolf River on the south side, swings around to head North at Germantown Parkway, cuts off westward onto Meadow Lane Drive, where it meanders a bit in that neighborhood to enclose the Evangelical Christian school before it meets up with the rail line that is on the North side of Shelby Farms, thus enclosing the entirity of Shelby Farms firmly *within* the Memphis City Borders. The map has a date on it of 2002, comes from as official a source as you can get, is high resolution and extremely detailed, and should put rest any argument about this rather silly topic. Shelby Farms is absolutely inside Memphis. Period. As for population density, I do not know, you may be correct. I'll investigate it later.Otto42 20:16, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
    • While I do still not have figures on population density, I do have this source: http://www.sfparkalliance.org/about/ which states: "Shelby Farms Park, at 4,500 acres, is the largest urban park in the U.S. that is encompassed within a major urban area."
    • Thanks, you're quite right. It is inside the Memphis border. I'm still confused about it being a county park. Please understand, I would be delighted for Shelby Farms to be the largest urban park in America; I enjoy visiting it when I'm in Memphis. The only problem is, there are lots of other urban parks; have you checked the wikipedia pages on urban parks? There's South Mountain Park in Phoenix (16,000 acres), Mission Trails Regional Park in San Diego (5800 acre), Forest Park in Portland (over 5,000 acres). There's also Mill Creek Park in Youngstown, Ohio, 2600 acres, which claims (in Wikipedia) to be "the second largest park in the US after Fairmount Park in Philadelphia." The latter claims to be 9200 acres. So Central Park is not the standard for large urban parks at all. This is all quite fascinating - thanks for getting me going - it suggests that work is needed on the urban parks articles in the Wikipedia. And I really don't think you should neglect Overton Park, which is not included in the Wikipedia, but is also a fascinating park. Ngriffeth 22:27, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
      • This is really just nit-picking over what the claim actually is. The Shelby Farms Alliance claim is very clear, with the main claim being "largest urban park in the U.S. that is encompassed within a major urban area". So, let's look:
      • Fairmont Park in Philadelphia is just an all-encompassing name for what is, in fact, 65 separate parks.
      • South Mountain Park in Phoenix is not entirely within the Phoenix City Limits.
      • Forest Park in Portland has the same problem, it's not entirely within Portland.
      • Mission Trails Regional Park in San Diego, I have little information on. It may or may not be entirely encompassed within the city limits.
      • Anyway, all this is still rather silly, IMO. It might be an interesting subject for a Wikipedia page of it's own, although some people might think it to be original research or listcruft. I would disagree, but still, it's not a claim that should be made on the Memphis page, except to say that Shelby Farms, is, in fact, entirely located within Memphis. Otto42 15:07, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Memphis does have a large urban park, Overton Park, which is 342 acres. Only 40% as big as Central Park, but definitely urban. Ngriffeth 18:08, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

• • Did anyone ever notice that the article reads (and always read) that "Shelby Farms is one of the largest urban parks in the United States."[emphasis added]? I did that on purpose to avoid controversy about who has the largest urban park. doxTxob \ ^talk 00:58, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

sections/suburbs

I think we need to reorginize this. Do we want to name each and every individidual neighborhood in this area: example: Victorian village which is debatably midtown/downtown and *The Village, East Memphis[1] which is part of East Memphis.

I think we should stick to massive neighboorhoods that people refer to that part of town as. For example: even though Cordova has Countrywood, Berryhill, and several other subdivisions, many people still refer to it as Cordova. ditto for Whitehaven. same with Downtown memphis, midtown, Orange Mound etc. You can still make an article on the neighboorhoods but i think their should be a heirarchy of the links. We can put East Memphis on the memphis page, and when you get on the East Memphis Article there can be another list of the neighborhood encompassing East Memphis. same can go for Cordova, Germantown and whatever. I think this will clean that section of the Memphis article up a little bitBarcode 15:06, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

The sections do need a lot of cleanup ;) IMHO Orange_Mound,_Memphis is the only decently written article. mrh 04:14, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

I'd recomend striking the suburbs section from this article entirely. The MSA link includes the full list of suburbs, while there doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason as to why this particular subset of the suburbs have direct links here. (Some of the suburbs touching Memphis are included, others are not; some are inside Shelby County, others are not; some of those listed are larger suburbs while others are quite small, etc.) 168.166.196.40 13:41, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

At least as of the last time I was in that area (1996) there was quite a dispute on what exactly is the western border of East Memphis which may make listing by subdivision problemic. Germantown though is it's own city and so it's details wouldn't belong in this article. Jon 18:03, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Memphis Riots not mentioned

Shortly after the Civil War there was a major race riot in Memphis. I will research it a bit and try to update the article.

There was also a large riot where KKK members marched on MLK's birthday (or assaination?). Also on a somewhat related note is the mention of Forester (KKK founder) and problems with giving respect to a brilliant Civil War general but who created the fraternity which would turn into one of the largest hate groups in American history. But I dont know how worthy that is to mention.

• Yeah. The riot you're talking about wasn't really big. Just a few broken store windows, broken up by mounted police downtown. There was a large riot (rightly so, I suppose) when MLK, Jr. was assassinated, and also violence associated with the sanitation strike on behalf of which he came to Memphis to speak.

Talking about the issues with Nathan Bedford Forrest (I assume that's who you're talking about) isn't very objective, is it? I mean, maybe there could be a brief mention that the city has many parks controversially named after Confederate generals, etc., but commenting on whether or not it's appropriate is, IMO, a massive breach of NPOV. Kevinlipe 07:40, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually during the 1866 riot over 30 people were pronounced dead and 50 were wounded, that is certainly worth mentioning in this article! [2] 74.128.200.135 02:34, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

No, it really is not. If you want to mention the riot as a section about the history of the city, then that's fine, but specific facts and details of the riot would deserve their own article. This is an encylopedia article about the city, not a complete historical reference. If you want to talk about that riot, give it an article to itself and link there from here. Otto42 19:19, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was in Memphis when he got assassinated...it was down town Memphis in a hotel..by the name of i have no clue but it is now the Civil Rights Museum!I.L.O.V.E.D.R.M.A.R.T.I.N.L.U.T.H.E.R.K.I.N.G.J.R. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.125.74.4 (talk) 17:00, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

It's called the Lorraine Motel and it's already linked to in the article. -- Otto 20:49, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Corrupt Mayor

What is this about the mayor being the most corrupt in America? Doesn't sound like a statement rooted in fact, more like an opinion...Should that be taken out? [unknown anom editor]

Almost certaintely doesn't belong here. Jon 18:05, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was in Memphis when he got assassinated...it was down town Memphis in a hotel..by the name of i have no clue but it is now the Civil Rights Museum!I.L.O.V.E.D.R.M.A.R.T.I.N.L.U.T.H.E.R.K.I.N.G.J.R.

Nicknames, image sizes, and so on.

The nickname section of city infoboxes is usually reserved for the more recognized nicknames of that city, so I removed a handful of the more obscure or less common ones. Many, many cities are referred to by their residents by the city's first initial or the first part of it's name followed by -town (Take 'nap-town' for Annapolis, MD for an amusing example,) and frequently by their area codes as well. There's no need to add every single nickname used for a given city - I think two is enough. New York City only has its primary nick, "The Big Apple" listed, even though it has several others. -- Vary | Talk 23:13, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks to Jersyko for removing the unfree maps and resizing some of the bigger images. Chris2008 , I'd appreciate if you'd please discuss the disputed changes here with us so we can come to a consensus about what's the best format to use. I'm leaving the nicknames in for the time being to avoid an edit war, but it seems to me they really do not belong in the infobox. The infobox is a kind of quick reference for facts on the city, and an alternate name that a non-resident is unlikely to ever encounter is not useful there. Please do reply and let us know why you think the larger images and inclusion of the added nicks are important. Thanks. -- Vary | Talk 05:20, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

• In order to build consensus, I would like to second all of Vary's comments regarding nicknames and images. - Jersyko talk 21:16, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree, most of the nicknames in question do not really belong in the infobox as nicknames. Some city articles have referred to the airport code, the area code, and a few other abbreviations as colloquialisms, usually referred to in the introductory paragraph (see Albuquerque, New Mexico or Richmond, Virginia as examples). But I think it's best to keep the nicknames list in the infobox pretty simple. Dr. Cash 23:11, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Nicknames

Memphis nickname is not star of the southwest or whatever else is on there. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chris2008 (talk • contribs) .

• You're right. I apologize for reverting your change in its entirety, I will try to pay more attention next time. However, I have removed some of the nicknames you have added, per the comments in the above section of this talk page. - Jersyko talk 04:10, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Pictures

I would like to add pictures of the hernando desoto bridge and a skyline picute. When you first go to the page it should be a picture of the skyline of memphis, tennessee like every other major city has a picture of there skyline. There shouldn't be a picture of Beale St. when you first go to the page. It should go under Other Points of Interest. user:chris2008

• While the pictures of the bridge is admittedly nice, it and all other pictures taken from this website are not distributed under a free license. In fact, the website says "Downloads by others than the media or tour operators, if not permitted in writing by Tennessee Tourism, are illegal." Tennessee Tourism, despite the deceptive title of the page, is a private company, not a state department of Tennessee. Thus, use of the pictures, and any others from this website, on Wikipedia is copyright infringement (of course we still have a fair use claim . . . but better not to use that if we can avoid it). I do agree, however, that the Memphis skyline would be a better picture for the infobox, provided that a free license picture can be found. - Jersyko talk 23:22, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

• I did not get the picture of the new bridge during the day from that website so we still should beable to see that one. user:chris2008

Ive got some better pictures of the bridges that I took. I'll replace the two that are currently there in a few days. Barcode 16:53, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

There are many good pictures at http://www.memphiswallpaper.com/ . I know the owner of this site (and taker of those pictures), and am totally confident that he would give permission for anybody to use them for any reason whatsoever. He can be contacted on his website at paulryburn.com.

Saks picture

This article generally needs a LOT of cleanup work. While I think it is appropriate to mention David Saks in this article, this should not be done in the introductory paragraph (along with the massive list of musicians), but later in the article. That being the case, there *certainly* doesn't need to be a low-quality (as in, blurry, poorly white balanced, low resolution) picture in the intro. I will not remove the picture for now, as doing so would be in violation of the three revert rule, but I think it might be a good idea to do so . . . - Jersyko talk 03:46, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

• I've done a little research on David Saks. This is his homepage. There is at least some corroboration that he wrote one of the "official songs of Memphis" (of which there appear to be several). There is not, however, much evidence of Mr. Saks' involvement in the Memphis community to such an extent that he warrants a mention in the intro to the article. I will not go further in my suggestions in this regard, but merely present the evidence for the perusal of others. - Jersyko talk 04:58, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm inclined to think we don't need a pic of Saks in this article at all. He's only mentioned breifly, and there aren't pictures of any of the other artists mentioned in the article. A picture of him would belong in his own article.

I agree on the intro; it's way too long, and most of the info on local artists can probably go under 'culture' or under a seperate heading (say, 'Local Artists'?) All we really need is the first paragraph, as is, and maybe a second one referencing the city's musical heritage?

Also, while the new picture in the citybox is an inprovement over the Beale Street one, I think the one that was in there up until mid-January or so is better. I'm not sure why it was moved, (it's now under 'Geography and Climate') but swaping it with the one that's in the citybox now might be a good idea. The code specifically requests a skyline, and the current image doesn't quite fit that description. Some of the other images in the article could use some adjusting, too. -- Vary | Talk 06:16, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

On the subject of cleanup, I think the next thing that should be tackled is the list of sections and suburbs. Should that maybe be broght in line with the style used in the state boxes, as at the bottom of the article? Putting the list on a few lines, rather than giving each item its own line, would go a long way towards making the article look neater. It can also probably go nearer to the bottom, I would think. -- 06:21, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm not at all sure about my placement of the list of entertainers from the intro, but I know it didn't belong where it was. I hope someone else can think of a better place to put it. -- Vary | Talk 06:37, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

I removed the picture because: 1) he is mentioned only briefly in the article, 2) he is not noteworthy enough (most people do not think of him when you mention "memphis"), and 3) considering all the important people in Memphis' history, such as Elvis and Martin Luther King, Jr., and considering their pictures are not in the article, then it is difficult to justify Saks' picture. If there is a Saks article, then that is where the picture would belong. - Dozenist talk 13:59, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. If we're going to have a picture of an artist, it should be someone along the lines of Elvis, Arethra Franklin, Jonny Cash, or B.B. King. -- Vary | Talk 17:33, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

• There is no mention of David Saks on the Commercial Appeal's website. A google search of "David Saks" and the word "Memphis" reveals: (1) his homepage, (2) links to realtor websites, and (3) links to web portals. Again, I'm only presenting this information for other editors to consider. I will not take any action in regard to Saks in this article or the article about Mr. Saks that was recently written ( this is why). - Jersyko talk 17:35, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

It would be great toupdate skyline picture

Official Song

I can't find any reference to 'In Memphis' being an official song of the city, just 'One Last Bridge'. I'm going to go ahead and remove the other song pending confirmation of its status. If this was an 'Official Resolution' you'd think there would be some record of it somewhere. Mr. Saks's own web page doesn't even mention either song, at least as far as I can tell. If we don't get better confirmation of the status of "One Last Bridge" then the myspace account of a nn band, I'd say we should take that one out, too. -- Vary | Talk 17:59, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I did find the reference on his web site, claiming both songs as Official Songs, but I had to use google to find it - the site is a mess. "In Memphis" is too common a phrase for a google test to yield accurate results, but a search for 'Saks "One Last Bridge"' gets two hits, the aforementioned page on Saks's web site, and this article. Not a good sign for notability. -- Vary | Talk 18:28, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

As there has still been no evidence presented that "In Memphis" was ever even recorded, I've re-removed that song, and added the name of the artist who performed "One Last Bridge." If anyone can verify that "In Memphis" is in fact a co-official song of Memphis, please do put it back in. Thanks. -- Vary | Talk 02:12, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

There most certainly is evidence of David Saks and his song "One Last Bridge" in The Commercial Appeal. You appear to be too hasty in removing Mr. Saks's name from the song "One Last Bridge". What a pity! Please see the following as proof: [3]

No one has attempted to 'remove Mr. Saks's name from the song.' I've removed the text of the article you cited and replaced it with a web link, (which I'd like to add was not easy to find even when I knew where to look!) as the text is copyrighted and can't be reproduced here. It looks better on the web site, anyway. In future, please provide links rather than pasting content into wikipedia. Thanks.

I have to note that the article refers to One Last Bridge not simply as Memphis's official song, but as its "official song of 1990." As such, I'm not sure it even belongs in the article. What about the official songs of 1991-2006? , For the time being, though, I'm just going to update the article to include this new information. -- Vary | Talk 07:08, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

I vote to remove the Song of 1990 stuff... or make another article that states Offical songs of memphis. --Barcode 16:10, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

If you vote to remove "the song of 1990 stuff" then surely you'll vote to remove the information regarding New orleans and the Voodoo Music experience from annual events in Memphis as this was a one time event. No one knows if it will be annual as is stated in the article. So as you can see, this is not completely accurate being listed under Annual Events..... - —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.248.228.85 (talk • contribs) .

You're quite right, at least in regard to the "annual" status of Voodoo in Memphis. Fixed, in that regard. I disagree, however, that it doesn't warrant a mention in this article, as the location of the event for 2005 received a decent amount of media coverage, quite a bit here in Memphis, and was attended by thousands of people. The New Orleans Saints, for example, are mentioned in the New York Giants article for a similar reason. - Jersyko talk 20:50, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

yes. but somewhere it needs to be noted that the Voodoo whatever music thing happened in memphis this year. perhaps in another article —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Barcode (talk • contribs) .

You're correct. The Voodoo music thing should be mentioned in a New Orleans article and not Memphis since it surely belongs to and in New Orleans. - —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.70.152.126 (talk • contribs) .

"...it surely belongs to and in new orleans"? That sounds like a statement arguing an opinion. And all of us here, I am sure, value highly the issue of NPOV. Though the Voodoo fest was originally in New Orleans, the historic event of having it take place (partly) in Memphis with thousands of people attending is a good reason to have it mentioned in this article. At least for now. Perhaps I can be persuaded years from now when having a Voodoo fest in Memphis is a "blip" on the radar. Perhaps. Then again, we digress. The entire list of official songs of Memphis for every year is not something that should be listed in this article. A separate article could be created for such an endeavor, considering how easy it has been to track down this information. - Dozenist talk 00:39, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

I stand by my previous comment. The Voodoo Fest belongs in an article on New Orleans. The only reason that it was an "historic event" in Memphis was due sadly to Katrina and so many of the New Orleans musicians had been displaced by Katrina to Memphis. While it was inspiring that it attracted many people, Voodoo Fest only attracted thousands of people in Memphis because of the dire situation in New Orleans. The sooner that New Orleans can return to normal and claim all of Vooddoo Fest, the better. Memphis does not need to claim it too. Thoughts of Voodoo and Memphis? I think not! Official songs of Memphis written and composed by local musicians should be on the Memphis page. The information was not so difficult to track if you looked properly in "The Commerical Appeal". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.248.228.85 (talk • contribs) .

I disagree. Someone researching Memphis today would be interested to learn how the city supported the people of New Orleans by hosting an even that is an important tradition for the city's residents when Katrina made holding the event in New Orleans impossible. Fifteen years from now the information might no longer be relevant, but that's the beauty of a wiki - old, outdated information can easily be removed by anyone.

I agree with Dozenist that, if a more complete list of the annually selected Official Songs of Memphis can be compiled, a separate article might be appropriate. Does anyone know what the current year's official song is, or if the honor is even still awarded annually? -- Vary | Talk 03:03, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

There doesn't appear to be any other mention of an "official song" of Memphis in the Commercial Appeal's archives, nor in the Memphis Flyer's (the city's only other somewhat widely read daily besides the Memphis Business Journal). In looking at the city council's actions for 2004 and 2005, I don't see anything about other adopted official songs. I suppose the only way to compile a list would be to trek to city hall and ask to look at the relevant records. - Jersyko talk 03:29, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Has anyone considered that Mr. Saks's song is the only Official Song of Memphis? "One Last Bridge" was proclaimed the Official Song in 1990 and deserves to be mentioned on the Memphis site. It is as relevant as Tallest Buildings. It doesn't make much sense that the Memphis City Council would proclaim an official song every year.

Regarding someone researching Memphis and learning that the city supported New Orleans with a Voodoo Fest, I don't think it would be of much interest as Voodoo Fest is too new to be considered a "tradition" even by the New Orleans natives. If Memphis were to host Jazz Fest or Mardi Gras, true New Orleans traditions, this would be noteworthy. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.248.228.85 (talk • contribs) .

Please sign your posts. You can do so with ~~~~. Regarding whether there is only one official song, well, the article in the commercial appeal makes it clear that it is only the official song of 1990. Thus, it stands to reason that there's at least a good chance that there are others, for other years. Additionally, the editor who originally added the information on Mr. Saks to the article also mentioned another song, titled "In Memphis," as an "official song of Memphis" (though this was not able to be confirmed through online research). There seems to be a decent amount of evidence that there is more than one song, but we certainly can't conclude one way or the other without looking at what the city council has done. - Jersyko talk 04:33, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Ahhh! Now we are getting somewhere. Mr. Saks had two songs proclaimed songs of the year by the Memphis City Council in 1990. How many other Memphis composers can claim this honor? Not many! He is the composer of "In Memphis" as well as "One Last Bridge". This is even more of a reason that he deserve to be on the Memphis page...--70.248.228.85 13:49, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

As I pointed out, however, this claim as to the second song was completely unverified, except on his homepage. It seems that you're arguing two different things at the same time: (1) "One Last Bridge" is the only official song of Memphis, and (2) there are multiple songs, two of which have been written by Mr. Saks, thus they should be mentioned in this article. These arguments are, of course, mutually exclusive. The safest course to take at this point is to not draw any premature conclusions 'as to the number of songs but to do further research with the city council to figure out exactly what the city's official songs are. If my schedule permits it, I will swing by city hall in the next couple weeks or so and see what I can find. - Jersyko talk 14:39, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

That would be a great idea. Because so far, there is very little reason to have him mentioned on the Memphis page as it is. I have been asking everyone I know that have lived here for a long time, none of which know this guy. If instead he is only really known in smaller circles in the Memphis music scene, then that is not enough of a reason to have his name in the article about Memphis. Tell me if I can help with going to the City Council, Jersyko. - Dozenist talk 16:16, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Memphis is a large city and asking everyone "you know" may not be the right people to ask. Mr. Saks was born in Memphis and has lived there all of his life. Checking with the Mempis City Council is a terrific idea. Once you verify that Mr. Saks is the recipient of two awards from the Memphis City Council for two songs of the year, then his name should remain on this site. He represents the city more than a mention of Voodoo Fest. Why not mention a Stones concert, they attracted thousands to Memphis as well.--70.248.228.85 16:58, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

You're mentioning him on the page because Memphis has "Official Songs of the Year" and he is the composer of these songs. In this case, it makes no difference who is familiar with Mr. Saks. This information is as interesting as any of the other categories that are listed under Memphis.--70.248.228.85 17:34, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

The Voodoo Music Experience is unquestionably notable and belongs in the Memphis article. The search string '"voodoo music experience" Memphis' yields 23,000 results. [4] The search string '"david saks" memphis' yields 358. [5] While an in-depth discussion of the event and its history would not belong on this page, the brief mention we have there now is appropriate.

He has had two songs - one verifiable and one unverifiable - that were made official songs of the year in Memphis. There has so far only been one source cited that would be considered authoritative under Wikipedia:Citing sources is from a small local paper, Commercial Appeal, and it is not an announcement of the award, but discusses the author and producer's disappointment that the song was not used in an advertising campaign for the city. [6] I will wait to see the outcome of the AFD for the Saks page, to see if he is determined to be notable under WP:MUSIC, but if not, I would say that the reference should come out of the article. Again, if someone is able and willing to do the research to find out the rest of the songs that have been awarded this honor, and if it is an award that was given for a reasonable number of years, it might be appropriate to create a separate article listing these songs. This would be an ideal project for a Memphis resident with knowledge of the local music scene.

Again, it's not a good sign for notability when you can find only one reputable reference from a relatively minor publication. If Mr. Saks and his work are as well known in Memphis as the user who's advocating for keeping his article feels, it should be easy to provide links to more articles in commercial appeal and other local publications citing his notability as a musician and composer. (I repeat, links, please, as I'm not going to go digging out the link on my own again, and any copyrighted material that is pasted onto this or any other page will have to be removed per WP:Copyrights.) If any of this is unclear, please see the notability requirements linked to above. -- Vary | Talk 20:37, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

How many "hits" have the other categories, Tallest Buildings for example received? I'm sure they've not received the 23,0000 that you cite for "Voodoo Memphis nor the 348 that Mr. Saks has received. "Commercial Appeal", small, local newpaper? It is the oldest and only major newspaper in Memphis. It does not matter that Mr. Saks's work is not well known in Memphis. What is notable is that his two songs "One Last Bridge" and "In Memphis" were cited by the Memphis City Council as Official Songs of Memphis. Most people are not familiar with the composers of songs. Official Songs of Memphis and Mr. Saks listed as the composer is as relevant and notable in the Memphis article as some of the other categories. I stand by my --207.70.152.126 22:52, 8 February 2006 (UTC)earlier statement that "Voodoo Experience" ranks up there with a Stones concert and is not pertinent to Memphis. The Stones site receives more than 23,000 hits and though they performed to thousands of people their concert is not listed on the Memphis site. Mr. Saks is a Memphian, the majority of the performers at the "Voodoo Fest" are from other cities.

Thankfully, we have more than just one person working on this article to try to get this straightened out. As it stands, we are now agreeing on things that would make Saks not notable for the Memphis article. For example, 1) "Most people are not familiar with the composers of songs", 2) "Mr. Saks's work is not well known in Memphis", and 3) There is not much sign of widespread acclaim of Mr. Saks as evident by the google search. The most important aspect of Mr. Saks is that he is the composer of one song that was the official song of Memphis in 1990 (The only thing verified so far, if I am up to date with the discussion). That being the case, it is still only noteworthy if it is the only song (or one of a very few) that is Memphis' official song. If there are many songs, then "One Last Bridge" is not as noteworthy. Thankfully, we have access to city hall, and we will be able to gather that information soon. Concerning everything else mentioned here, not only do most people in Memphis recognize the names of Voodoo Fest and Clark Tower, the majority of them would also say those things are important to Memphis--- more important than one of many Stones concerts occuring in any number of cities. Any argument otherwise stands against the majority of views here. - Dozenist talk 14:40, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

The majority of viewers here did not know where to find Mr. Saks's name mentioned in the Commercial Appeal. It had to be shown to them. Many Memphians recognize the name "Mr. Bingle", which is also important to many Memphians, but I don't see him mentioned. Like a Stones concert, "Voodoo Fest" is also being held in "any number of cities", New Orleans. It does still count as a city, doesn't it? I stand by my previous comments--70.248.228.85 16:23, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Another article has been located in the archives of The Commercial Appeal, dated November 26, 1992, by Peggy McKenzie. This article is titled "Passion is Stamped In Collector's Hobby". In addition ti stamp collecting, the article states that Mr. Saks is the recipient from the Memphis City Council for two of his songs, one in 1990 and one in 1991. After further research, the two songs in question, "One Last Bridge" was named the Official Song on May 22, 1990 and the other song, "In Memphis" received this prestigious award on May 24, 1991. After checking with , Assistant City Administrator, for the Memphis City Council, no other songs have received this award in the fourteen years that she has been working for the City of Memphis.--70.248.228.85 00:48, 10 February 2006 (UTC)--70.248.228.85 00:48, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

That's useful information, thanks for providing it. Did you happen to ask about pre-1990 songs? - Jersyko talk 00:50, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

I'd appreciate a link to the article, please. For info on adding links to Wikipedia, please see Wikipedia:How to edit a page. Thanks -- Vary | Talk 00:54, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. stated that she has been working for the City of Memphis since 1992, and was not aware that the City Council had named official songs in the fourteen years that she has held in this position. I'm awaiting a response for pre-1990. I'll try to send you the link for the above article. --70.248.228.85 01:54, 10 February 2006 (UTC) [http://www.commercialappeal.com/--70.248.228.85 02:34, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

We're still waiting for that source. Unsourced information in an article may be challenged and removed. Additionally, Wikipedia:Notability (songs) seems to provide some guidance here. Thus, the source must, at the very least, prove the content of the information asserted, but it should also prove the notability of the information asserted. · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 17:39, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm surprised this stayed in the article as long as it did; I thought it had been removed. Even if this were credibly sourced, it wouldn't be notable enough for inclusion. And the personal attacks from the anon who wants the reference in are not helping the song's case. -- Vary | Talk 20:52, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Should we request for protection, we seem to have a small edit war going on right now with a rotating IP address. Barcode 21:29, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Probably not a bad idea. Don't forget that the IPs are User:Reneec, and that Reneec has an indef block right now, so any edits by the IPs are a violation of WP:SOCK. Basically, it's not a bad idea to revert any edits by the IPs immediately no matter where they are made. · j e r s y k o talk · 21:38, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Neighborhoods

The listing of neighborhoods is seriously messed up! North Memphis and Raliegh are two separate neighborhoods, with Raliegh lying several miles to the east of North Memphis. Cordova is not anywhere near "southeast Memphis." Cordova is, in fact, the furthest east section of Memphis, lying neither north nor south of town, but instead along Germantown Parkway between the town of Germantown and US-64. Southeast Memphis is called Hickory Hill and is the area served by TN-385 (Nonconnah/Bill Morris Parkway). I don't really know the computer language necessary to edit the page, so if somebody could do this for me, I'd appreciate it.

Photo of St Judes

The photo of St Judes on this page is being claimed fair use. However the justification on the fair use tag being used states that the image is only fair use "in the absence of free images that could serve such a purpose". It should be a relatively easy task for a wikipedian in the Memphis area to go and get a photo of the hospital, meaning that the fair use in this case isn't really justified. JeremyA 00:44, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Memphis Metro

I am thinking of creating an article about Memphis Metropolitan area, similer to Atlanta metropolitan area. this is to remove some clutter on this article. primarily the suburbs, and districts of memphis, which are poorly organized and in some cases just wrong. any thoughts anyone? Barcode 16:16, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Last week I posted a link on this site and no longer than a couple hours later it was taken off the site. I understand why the link was removed because of the dangers of spam, but I would like to try to repost my link http://memphis.tennessee dot com/ I have some very useful information on Memphis that would benefit this website and the link I am posting goes to a very informative site in just about anything in Memphis, TN. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Problems in Memphis

The article looks terrific but omits all facts that would deemed as derogatory toward Memphis. Such as: Memphis ranks number one in the nation for infant mortality. Memphis ranks number one in the nation for child pedestrian deaths. Memphis ranks forth in the nation for high crime, and a few others.

I'll add this section later this week. If anyone has WP:OWN sentiments, please speak your mind now. Any advice on a section title and content would be appreciated. Thanks. Scribner 19:47, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps you could use the Detroit, Michigan article as a guide in one respect: there's a subsection titled "Crime." Perhaps it could be a subsection of a subsection in this article, maybe under "people and culture." The other information should probably be noted in pre-existing subsections of the "people and culture" section, perhaps under "demographics." · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 19:56, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Economy Addition of Crye-Leike

The economy section lists several companies that are based out of or headquartered in Memphis. It could also make mention of Crye-Leike. Crye-Leike is headquartered in Memphis - started/founded in Memphis and in business since 1977. It is now the nations 4th largest firm. Reference - http://www.crye-leike.com/corporate/about.php Angeliquev (talk) 17:38, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Stax Museum Link

I suggest someone who knows how create a link the Stax Museum's Website <www.soulsvilleusa.com> to either the tourism or at least the other points of interest. Stax is a cultural icon and should be noted in an article such as this. thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.64.157.7 (talk) 21:47, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protection

I have indefinitely semi-protected this talk page to prevent an indefinitely blocked user from continuing to harass others here with multiple IPs solely to promote himself. This has been going on for nearly two years now. I would direct new and anonymous users to either my talk page or the requests for protection page to request a change in protection status or request an edit to this page. · jersyko talk 18:24, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Good idea! I have seen that going on. I don't think that the protection is going to be much of a disturbance as only anonymous or new users are affected. What a pity that some people just don't get it and make it more difficult for the decent majority of editors. Thanks! doxTxob \ ^talk 18:35, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia on DVD ... incl. Memphis

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

Memphis is planned to be one of the articles. Should there be important additions or improvements on anyone's mind or something major needs to be fixed. Now is the time!

I do not see any problems, really. Well, we should make sure that the infamous official songs of Memphis are not accidentally included in the release.

For more information on the project, visit the WikiProject Tennessee Talkpage. October 20 is the deadline. doxTxob \ ^talk 21:28, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protection requested

I have requested to semi-protect the page indefinitely at WP:RFP today. On 08/15/08 the former semi-protection was lifted but since then, continuously and in a very persistent fashion there is non-notable material added by an anonymous editor, despite lengthy discussions about the lack of notability. doxTxob \ ^talk 18:52, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Damn, it got denied. How long do we have to wait before trying again? Because this guy is just going to keep on doing it, and we can see that his IP changes a lot. -- Otto 13:58, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that guy is really persistant. What surprised me was that he started again shortly after the old semi-protection was lifted. On WP:RFP it is stated that the disruptions have to be on a daily basis more or less until page protection is considered appropriate. I guess we have to report the IPs and remove edits manually. Although with changing IPs there's not much chance that reporting would be sucessful to block the edits. I understand that it is detrimental to have too many pages with strong protection, because one of the important facets with Wikipedia is that everyone can edit, so protection should be kept to a minimum. But semi-protection is not very strong at all (that's why they have it as an alternative to full protection, probably) it just keeps anonymous users and very new accounts from editing, so not very many legitimate editors are kept out, if any at all. doxTxob \ ^talk 17:05, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Article has been protected for one week. Not sure that this is going to help long term but better than nothing. doxTxob \ ^talk 17:55, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

He's back, at User:208.54.7.153. -- Otto 19:27, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh no! Is it ever going to stop? doxTxob \ ^talk 19:53, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, probably not until somebody goes over there and tells him to stop it in person. Sigh.

His home IP is obviously 74.242.187.165 which is a DSL connection somewhere over in East Memphis. The other connections he's used have been a Comcast connection (presumably his workplace), an AT&T phone, and just today a T-Mobile hotspot, but judging from the two IP address from that aDSL connection, and examining a map of the phone stations, I'd say he lives within a couple miles of Memorial Park cemetery. I'd need better logs to pinpoint his address.

Might call my BellSouth friend up, see what he can tell me. -- Otto 20:08, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I got it protected for 2 more weeks. -- Otto 16:16, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Quote copied from the RFP page on the protection:

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Normally, I'd decline this because of the sporadic nature of the vandalism; however, the really bizarre range of IPs vandalizing it seem to warrant special action. I've given it a two-week protection; if you'd like any more help, please feel free to come by my talk page. Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP! :)} 23:18, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Biased Tone of this Entry / Yellow Fever Epidemic

The overall tone of the Wiki entry on Memphis seems to too easily gloss over more troublesome aspects of the city's history, one of which is the devastating yellow fever epidemic of 1878, which was a very important part of the history of Memphis. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.104.221.239 (talk) 17:03, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

First, I would not consider that "biased". Second, this is supposed to be a general encyclopedia article on Memphis, not a complete authoritative history of Memphis. While the epidemic was a big deal (more than half of Memphis' population at the time left), I'm not sure that it warrants a mention in this particular article. The epidemic is mentioned more over at the other more complete article: History of Memphis, Tennessee. -- Otto 17:16, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

It warrants at least a mention. nut-meg (talk) 07:28, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I disagree with Otto about the significance of the yellow fever epidemics (there were several in the 1870s). These were major events in the city and caused it to become less significant nationally than its two sister cities, St. Louis and Atlanta. Furthermore, since the time that the separate History of Memphis, Tennessee article was created, the history section of the parent article has been reduced beyond what one would expect for a parent article. More of the major historical events should be included in abbreviated form. --Zeamays (talk) 01:00, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Why don't you just go ahead and change what you think needs changing in the parent article? Wikipedia, apart from trying to be an accurate encyclopedia, is also about being bold with your edits and that means if you hate it and have an idea to improve the article, do it. doxTxob \ ^talk 03:11, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Which year was Memphis founded?

Hi there, this issue is of concern for the Memphis article and the History of Memphis, Tennessee. I have written two articles in which the friendship and business relationship of James Winchester, John Overton (judge) and Andrew Jackson are mentioned (Randolph, Tennessee and John Overton (judge)). In the context, it is nessecary to also mention the foundation of Memphis, because they made some good money when they founded Memphis. The question that arises here is: In which year was Memphis founded?

The Memphis article (and the History of Memphis, Tennessee, too) indicate the year as 1820. The source used in the article does not confirm that. The two sources below suggest 1819 as the foundation date.

• History of Memphis Citation: "[Memphis] ... was surveyed and designed in 1819."

• TN Encyclopedia - John Overton Citation: "As a founder of Memphis (1819) on land he owned ..."

The article about James Winchester offers even the date of the foundation as May 22, 1819 that without any inline references, though. So it is unclear if the source (McHenry, Robert. Webster's American Military Biographies, Springfield, Mass.: G & C. Merriam Co., 1978) covers the date, too.

I did a little more searching on the internet and was surprised how little I could find about the topic. Can anyone offer some good and reliable source for the year of the foundation? It would be nice to have the correct year in all of the articles mentioning the foundation, backed by a good source. But I am not sure if "surveyed and designed" or the year in brackets "(1819)" really refers to the year of the foundation.

Any help is welcome! Thank you. doxTxob \ ^talk 21:12, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

http://www.memphislibrary.lib.tn.us/history/memphis2.htm places it on May 22, 1819 as well. -- Otto 14:34, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Great! Does that look good enough to change the year to 1819 in the article? doxTxob \ ^talk 17:13, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

I have just changed the information to 1819. doxTxob \ ^talk 18:54, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

I have moved your comments on my discussion page to here, because here is where I started the discussion.

Riverboat Link

An editor has repeatedly deleted a straighforward link to the Memphis Riverboats site. He apparently considered it advertising. I differ with his interpretation of the Wiki guidelines. There are many links and references in Wikipedia to commercial entities, and, if not used excessively or ostentatiously, are not considered advertising. See:

"This page in a nutshell: Adding external links to an article can be a service to the reader, but they should be kept to a minimum of those that are meritable, accessible and appropriate to the article." - wikipedia Guidelines for External Links

The link I added complies with each of these. Perhaps if he disagrees, he will be kind enough to state why in detail. --Zeamays (talk) 01:26, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

If you want to add external links, they go at the bottom of the page under the ==External links== section, not in line with the text. If you want to add your link there, I have no objection. // Chris ^{(complaints)•(contribs)} 14:06, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but there is no reason a link cannot be in the text. This is common in Wikipedia articles, and perfectly justified here. BTW, it's not "my link", although it is important to include. --Zeamays (talk) 15:41, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Abuse - IP info

Examining the IP's making these changes, I find the following:

64.247.241.50 (talk · contribs · block log) - Connects back to a networktel.net static IP address, which is in Memphis. Senderbase tells me that mail.investectn.com is on the same IP block, at *.18. investectn.com is a commercial real estate firm in Memphis. David Saks is a realtor in Memphis, and he's big on self-promotion as well. Coincidence?

74.242.187.165 (talk · contribs · block log) & 74.242.164.168 (talk · contribs · block log) Both ADSL connections on bellsouth.net, both trace to somewhere in Germantown. No way to be specific here, although with the times of the edits, a BellSouth abuse rep could look at the logs and trace the specific person.

208.54.7.153 (talk · contribs · block log) TMobile hotspot - basically untraceable.

12.183.54.125 (talk · contribs · block log) AT&T - Ditto, could be any AT&T based device from anywhere.

Might be worth sending some emails to abuse@ or postmaster@ some of these places, since he's spamming Wikipedia. -- Otto 16:41, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure how much luck we'd have with abuse emails to Bellsouth, but it certainly couldn't hurt. In the meantime, I've issued some short blocks on several of these accounts, and I intend to temporarily block any IP account that makes this exact same edit (based on WP:EDITWAR#Enforcement, WP:SOCK#Blocking, and WP:EVADE). While not an ideal solution, it keeps the article from being permanently semi-protected. — Satori Son 17:23, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for blocking the IPs. doxTxob \ ^talk 19:30, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Sigh... More attempts. -- Otto 17:43, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

75.149.113.241 (talk · contribs · block log) Comcast. However, whois reports it as being reassigned by them to a McDonald's on 657 South Highland. Open Wifi, perhaps? Time of the edit in Memphis would be around 4 am.

141.225.64.198 (talk · contribs · block log) University of Memphis. The netblock is wide enough that it could be any connection on campus, no further details on this one. Contacting UofM administrators might be useful, university people are usually helpful about this sort of thing. Oddly, this one happened at 1 am.

I am glad that you post the IPs here and that you are able to identify where they are from. Very good work! Let's see how this continues for another week or so. This list of IPs can be perfectly used to argue in favour of the protection and not so much to continue blocking these IPs. As I see it, if all the IPs get blocked, we may disconnect parts of the UofM from Wikipedia as well as who knows how many McDonalds Wifi hotspots or what not. That cannot be what anyone could want. Wow, this IP blocking is far more disruptive than an indefinite protection would be. I really have problems to comprehend why it is so difficult to get the semi-protection in this case from some admin. That would be easy and smooth. If he's going to a different McDonalds every day, the IP blocking does not make sense, the unwanted information would still have to be removed manually every time. But what can we do ...?! doxTxob \ ^talk 21:55, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I basically agree with you. I don't think semi-protection is too much to ask for a non-controversial article, as the article is still editable to anybody with a user account. But if we have to show the level of vandalism going on here first, then so be it. -- Otto 18:46, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

74.242.164.60 (talk · contribs · block log) adsl-242-164-60.mem.bellsouth.net = ADSL connection on BellSouth.net. IP2Loc says it's in Germantown. No way to be sure of that. Because this guy apparently has DSL, he can change IPs easily, as it's just a matter of redialing the connection. Unlike cable modems, you don't tend to get a static IP for long periods of time.

74.238.212.251 (talk · contribs · block log) adsl-074-238-212-251.sip.mem.bellsouth.net, unusual in that it's the same exact IP as he had on September 28th. Possibly leeching of a neighbor's wifi?

74.177.22.86 (talk · contribs · block log) adsl-177-22-86.mem.bellsouth.net 70.146.190.187 (talk · contribs · block log) adsl-146-190-187.mem.bellsouth.net Nothing special about these two. Just random ADSL connections somewhere in Germantown.

98.98.108.38 (talk · contribs · block log) nmd.sbx08345.memphtn.wayport.net. Looks like our boy goes to Starbucks in the morning. :) -- Otto 21:32, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Can we please get a semi protect on this article now? Look at the recent edit history. He's like a third of the edits. -- Otto 08:29, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

98.98.104.70 (talk · contribs · block log) Another Starbucks.

65.15.163.162 (talk · contribs · block log) A Hampton Inn. 962 South Shady Grove Road, Memphis, TN.

141.225.67.70 (talk · contribs · block log) U of M.

The others are ADSL or Comcast cable lines. -- Otto 08:34, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Woot! Finally, a semi-protection! Yay!

For what it's worth, four of the latest cases of this guy have been done from 66.208.196.33 (talk · contribs · block log), which is a McDonald's over on South Highland (in Memphis). Since these have all been done at around 1 or 7 am, I suspect that our boy lives close to there and is leeching off their wifi. -- Otto 19:08, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Wow, eventually your efforts of tracking down all the IPs paid off. Great work! Thank you! doxTxob \ ^talk 22:16, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, and he's ticked off at me too. LOL. See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Otto42&diff=267384056&oldid=267240550 -- Otto 16:33, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

My goodness, that is pretty lame for a grown person ... Well, that shows once more that he does not get the point, even after almost two years. The story was discussed endlessly in the past and is shortly mentioned in Wikipedia's lamest edit wars, even stating his name. That is some questionable honor for him there. Strange, you would think that a real estate agent has some reputation to lose, I mean that stuff pops up at google if you do a search on his name. I am glad it is over for hopefully a long time. doxTxob \ ^talk 18:02, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

lol, it'll actually be three years next week. Apparently at one point he was trying to use his additions on Wikipedia to convince the Memphis city council that 'One Last Bridge' was the official song of Memphis. Strange dude. In the past we've had months of quiet between the spurts of edit warring and name-calling: I hate to see this article semi'd long-term because of one guy who can't accept reality, but he just doesn't seem to be losing interest this time, does he? -- Vary Talk 18:26, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Now there has been repeated vandalism on userpages on which he leaves lame, indecent, insulting and threatening comments. See User:Otto42's comment above and also here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:DoxTxob&oldid=268664745 both of them originating from 66.208.196.33 (talk · contribs · block log). Lameness is one thing but insulting and threatening other editors is quite something else. I hope that is not this kind of stuff that is going to continue for years now ... sigh! doxTxob \ ^talk 22:36, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

More userpage vandalism from 141.225.66.134 (talk · contribs · block log) (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:DoxTxob&diff=prev&oldid=269073187) doxTxob \ ^talk 05:23, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Page move from Memphis, Tennessee to Memphis, TN

I am not sure, maybe I have missed something here. The last time I checked it, settlement articles are supposed to be named according to the "City, State" convention and not "City, State abbreviation". They change a lot of stuff here on Wikipedia, unfortunately, which keeps battallions of editors busy. But this is new to me. If there is a reason for the move due to naming conventions that might have changed, I apologize here right away. If not, I would prefer the page moved back to "Memphis, Tennessee".

I will also notify the editor who initiated the change. doxTxob \ ^talk 21:46, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Seconded. There's been no naming convention change that I'm aware of. The relevant section, for the record. -- Vary Talk 02:04, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I have moved the page back. doxTxob \ ^talk 18:24, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Media section

Anybody want to work on a Media section, listing tv/radio/paper outlets in Memphis?

Found these already lying around to get started with: Template:Memphis TV Template:Memphis Radio

More to work with: Memphis is the #48 market in the country for television, according to the Nielsen DMA's.

-- Otto (talk) 19:39, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Unprotection?

Can this article and talk page be unprotected now so that unregistered users can edit and make comments? If the problems start up again we can easily reprotect. --TS 18:58, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

With everyone's favorite musician back, semi-protection may need to be considered again if the rate that he's inserting his claim increases. Ravensfire (talk) 16:35, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

How can one guy be a problem? Just revert and ignore. That way we get the benefit of non-logged-in edits such as this one. --TS 17:02, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

He does seem to be working from a relatively small pool of IP addresses these days; I seem to remember that he used to be on a constantly shifting IP, which got old fast... -- Vary (Talk) 17:47, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Revert and ignore ceases to be an option when he's doing it upwards of 3 or 4 times a day, which he's done in the past. I'm half convinced this guy is just running scripts to do it at this point, since the edits are *always* identical. I'd prefer permanent semi-protection, it seems warranted at this point.

Accounts are free, if somebody wants to register, it's a matter of seconds to do so. Also, quite frankly, anon users don't add enough to make it worth the time to merit a continual revert war.

That said, if he is only on a few IPs, banning those might work. However, in the past, he's been on DSL lines, which are easy to shift to new IPs, and blocking whole ranges doesn't seem justified. -- Otto (talk) 17:50, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

IP Addresses he's used recently:

141.225.64.111 (talk · contribs · block log) University of Memphis. They have the whole 141.225.0.0 - 141.225.255.255 netblock. However, this particular one resolves to mbialek-3.memphis.edu. "mbialek" turns out to be Mark Bialek, the (former?) program director for the WUMR radio station. One of the DJs at WUMR is none other than one David Saks. I find that rather interesting...

74.177.10.96 (talk · contribs · block log) resolves to adsl-177-10-96.mem.bellsouth.net , a BellSouth DSL line in Memphis. Getting a new IP on DSL is as simple as "redialing".

-- Otto (talk) 18:07, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

The guy has entered identical text just three times. It's a problem to be resolved by hitting the rollback button. We've actually spent much more effort discussing the problem than it merits. --TS 18:16, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

No. Check the history. He's entered this identical text well over 100+ times. I documented many of the IPs he used way back when. Heck, the last time this happened went on for 6 months. I'd really not like to have to keep reverting this jerk for another 6 months before getting the block in place again. -- Otto (talk) 18:18, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Unless we're able to block all the IP addresses he has access to, it's virtually guaranteed that he'll be re-adding this text at least daily for as long as the article is unprotected. If he continues to edit from University of Memphis IPs, an email to their IT contact might be in order, especially if he starts doing this sort of thing again. Anyone ever done one of those? I've never had to. I wonder if we can just get "Official Song of Memphis" added to one of the vandalbots' 'bad words' list? I don't know if there are performance issues with having too many items on those lists. I'm as tired of this guy as anyone, but keeping the article protected is just as much 'letting him win' as allowing his songs to stay in the article, so I'd love to see us make this a little harder for him without using protection. I could have sworn I came back and set an expiration for the last protection - the only reason I set it as indefinite initially was so he wouldn't have a date to put on his calendar. -- Vary (Talk) 18:53, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I still say it's less effort to hit the rollback button once a day then it is to spend days arguing about it. This is just one guy. --TS 10:12, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

"It's less effort to do as I say than it is to argue with me" is not really a fair argument. What worries me is not the additions themselves, but the accompanying harassment of editors who remove said additions, which seems to have gotten particularly nasty very early this time around. This is a guy who has at least once threatened to interfere with an editor professionally for removing his self-promotion from this article (although he fortunately wasn't bright enough to work out the editor's name before the revisions of the editor's userpage with identity clues were deleted). WP:RBI only works for editors who are just trying to be irritating; as long as he's able to add himself to this article, even if the change only stays in place for an hour or so at a time, I very much doubt he's going to get bored and leave. If the harassment and threats continue, I assume we'll have to take the matter to the technical contacts of some of the more commonly used IP ranges.

That said, I'm going to bring up blacklists again. Does anyone know more than me about how they work and if adding choice phrase or two to a bot's blacklist or the site's edit filter is an option? The flagged revisions trial is supposed to be rolled out in a few weeks, of course, which may make all this moot. -- Vary (Talk) 13:57, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry that you seemed to get the idea I was saying something along the lines of "I'll keep arguing until you agree with me so you might as well do as I say." No, I was saying that it's easy enough to revert this nuisance and spending effort trying to find out how to stop him being a nuisance at all is probably effort wasted. My apologies for not making myself clear earlier.

For blacklists, see Wikipedia:Spam blacklist. As you can see from the title, it's intended for use against spammers, not this kind of lone guy plugging his song, and it works on domains in links. --TS 14:12, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

That wasn't quite my point, Tony; I only meant that those of us who've been on the receiving end of this editor's vitriol are (obviously) very interested in finding a way to prevent his disruption altogether. It's even less effort to protect the page, isn't it?
I'm aware of the Spam blacklist and know that it's for external links only; that wasn't what I was talking about. I'll see if anyone else comes along who knows a bit about the other types of edit filters we use here. -- Vary (Talk) 15:10, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

LOL. He went straight to the personal attacks, this time, didn't he? http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Otto42&diff=314051023&oldid=309797345

And TS, I think you're missing our point. Continually reverting him is easy, sure, but NOT continually having to revert him is far easier. Furthermore, continually reverting him here as well as removing his continuous, anonymous, personal attacks, gets very old, very fast. We can't block the entire city of Memphis from anon edits. We can, however, block this article from them, with minimal impact. And as history has shown, when he can't post his crap anonymously, he ceases to bother us for long periods of time.

Semi-protecting this article is the easiest approach, with the most minimal impact. -- Otto (talk) 16:23, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protecting is easy, but not cost-free. Wikipedia is the encyclopedia anybody can edit, and anything we put between a reader and the editing process means fewer edits. That's why we allow people to edit without logging in.

If somebody wants to ask for the page to be semiprotected again, I won't stand in their way, but I do think it's much better to perform a rollback than to block all IP edits just because one guy abuses the feature. --TS 17:23, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protection was basically invented specifically for this sort of case. Where it's unfeasible to block a single user from continued vandalism of a specific page. Having continual rollbacks (there's been 3 *today*) makes the history of a page pretty worthless, which is much worse than having "fewer" edits. Especially on a page that shouldn't receive a lot of edits to begin with. I mean, face facts, Memphis is Memphis. It'll still be Memphis tomorrow. What possible edits of value can possibly be left for this article? Cleanup, new sources, new data, but there's not much left "new" to say about it, really. -- Otto (talk) 17:51, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

No, semi-protection was not created to deal with instances of a single editor being a nuisance. Having lots of rollbacks in the history isn't a problem; you can take the diff of any two revisions and intervening reverted edits will not feature.

If you think Wikipedia's article on Memphis shouldn't get many edits, you're wrong. Lots of work needs to be done. The weather table, for instance, was only added very recently, and to pick a subject at random there is nothing about local TV and radio services and newspapers. --TS 18:28, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Regretfully, I agree. It would be easier to just semi and forget it, but even for such a determined guy as Saks, it's not worth it. Just think of it this way - we'll get to see what new, unimaginative rantings Saks leaves for us, and can think of new and interesting ways to tell him that he's off-key with his notes, and he should just let the music die. Ravensfire (talk) 18:56, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Still disagree. My comments shouldn't be interpreted as me saying the article is in any way "complete", just that it's unlikely to get good edits that are needed from anon editors. The sort of edits that are likely to be done and accepted are not likely to be done by unregistered editors, that's all I mean. A semi-protection wouldn't affect this. -- Otto (talk) 19:46, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks to whatever clever person arranged for this. -- Vary | (Talk) 14:47, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes. Thanks for the effort. It was indeed worth a try, but ultimately a filter simply isn't going to protect against somebody trying a direct attack. Not unless the filter is too broad to begin with. The semi-protect is the only thing I can think of that will really work. -- Otto (talk) 15:15, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Move request affecting one of the redirects to here

Talk:Memphis (disambiguation)#Requested move should have been announced here, since the proposal is to move the disambiguation page to Memphis. Currently, Memphis → Memphis, Tennessee. -- JHunterJ (talk) 13:25, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Proposed Memphis WikiProject

Hi! I am proposing a Memphis Metropolitan Area WikiProject. Would anyone be interested in starting one? Normally I would propose a task force, but the project concerns a multi-state metro area, so it wouldn't work as a task force. WhisperToMe (talk) 01:36, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

3rd largest claim

3rd largest in the southeastern US is found in the Census data, which shows Memphis behind Jacksonville and Charlotte.Emjaymem (talk) 04:26, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Area

Sometimes I really hate this site. I love that we can make changes and correct things if they are wrong, but often you get stupid people changing values with not thought at all. All the area values given are the same in the stats box as the are in the geography section, but they just don't ass up. 313.8 sq mi (city) - 302.3 sq mi (land) does not equal 15.4 sq mi (water). I don't know which value is incorrect, so I can't change this. Also the metric equivalents for both city and land do not match their imperial values.

This is the area in which Wikipedia is let down. Statistics. VanillaBear23 (talk) 13:06, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Ongoing log of David Saks related vandalism

Here we go again.

141.225.66.126 (talk · contribs · block log) University of Memphis. -- Otto (talk) 21:33, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Another incident: 141.225.17.251 (talk · contribs · block log). Pinethicket (talk) 16:13, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

That one is also at the University of Memphis. -- Otto (talk) 19:55, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

74.177.10.124 (talk · contribs · block log) - he's back. Ravensfire (talk) 00:28, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

That one is a BellSouth DSL line. Could be anywhere in Memphis, but probably around the Germantown area. -- Otto (talk) 17:23, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Here's another one! Some people just never learn. - BilCat (talk) 06:55, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

And yet another one, from the same IP 40-odd days later. - BilCat (talk) 16:26, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Another: 14:12, 1 April 2011 by 74.177.12.45. Pinethicket (talk) 14:41, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

901Life.com Link

901Life.com is a social network for residents of Shelby County in the 901 area code. Some weeks ago I posted links to the site in the external links section of pages for various neighborhoods in the 901 area code. I was asked to suggest the link on the talk page to make sure the site is referencing these areas [Memphis, TN - Cordova - Germantown etc] before reinserting it. The assumption was made that I posted a link to the site to alter search engine rankings but as I know wikipedia uses nofollow tags that is not the case. If someone can agree that the site is in fact referring to Memphis & other Shelby County communities I would greatly appreciate them adding the link or stating that they have no objections with it being added.

• 901Life.com - Social Network

any help offered would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance. Chi soul

--Chi soul (talk) 20:05, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Generally, Wikipedia articles should not link to social networking sites. See #10 on WP:ELNO. I don't see your site as something useful to add to the article, sorry. Ravensfire (talk) 20:37, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

I have to agree with Ravensfire. Since Wikipedia is not a link repository, it has very specific guidelines as to which websites should be linked to. 901Life.com does not meet those standards, as Ravensfire has explained. You should consider listing it at dmoz.org, which is a specifically a link repository. — Satori Son 20:55, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

USA-centric POV

I was astonished to learn that 'Memphis' redirects straight away to Memphis, TN. This is USA-centric POV, the historical city of Memphis, Egypt is globally and historically much more important. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tom-b (talk • contribs) 18:55, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

This has been brought up before on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Memphis and I suggest you read the arguments there. Memphis, TN is far, far more likely to be the city being searched for than the ancient city of Memphis, Egypt. Wikipedia doesn't choose where links go based on "importance", but based on what is likely to be searched for.

From WP:PRIMARYTOPIC: "Although a term may potentially refer to more than one topic, it is often the case that one of these topics is highly likely - much more likely than any other, and more likely than all the others combined - to be the subject being sought when a reader clicks the "Go" button for that term. If there is such a topic, then it is called the primary topic...."

The primary topic for "Memphis" is clearly Memphis, TN Furthermore, if you want to use "importance" as your criteria, then Memphis, TN still wins. It's the birthplace of much of the music in the modern world. It's the primary shipping hub for the country and for a fair amount of the world as well (thanks to FedEx). On half a dozen different levels, Memphis, TN is far more important to modern day searchers than a dead city in Egypt which is really of interest only to historians. -- Otto (talk) 08:29, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Skyline Picture of Memphis

The Skyline picture of Memphis as seen from the Tom Lee park that we first see when reaching this page is silly to have there. Instead, the skyline picture as seen from the Hernando de Soto bridge (located further down on the page) should replace the existing one we are greeted with because it is a better representation of the Memphis skyline. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:0:B100:CB:118E:8B7F:AD92:B8B1 (talk) 12:42, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

If you include Sputnik Monroe, then why do you disregard Billy Wicks?

http://memphiswrestlinghistory.com/sc_wicks.html It is certain that this was the largest rivalry in Memphis for many years, and to not include Billy Wicks, while promoting Monroe is a failed attempt at being a real encyclopedia! You are actually following a very racial line of reasoning which is common amongst a lot of Liberals. 96.19.159.196 (talk) 05:18, 10 October 2013 (UTC)Ronald L. Hughes

I'm sorry, but what is your point here? Are you talking about a specific section of the article or what? And is there a reason why, considering this is Wikipedia, the encyclopedia anyone can edit, you are casting blame for whatever you think the problem is, rather than just correcting it? Gtwfan52 (talk) 06:01, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Crime-Free Memphis

Who removed the crime section without discussion?--Scribner (talk) 03:06, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I placed the following on doxtxob's user page: "Always discuss major changes, like removing or moving a section on the article's talk page. I had to dig through edits to discover your unreferenced move. Since both Detroit and St. Louis have crime sections on their main page, Memphis should as well. I never saw the reference to another article and neither will the average reader. A copy of this will be placed on the article talk page. Thanks!" Wow. --Scribner (talk) 03:42, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

As far as I am aware there is no rule about the placement of a crime section in a town or city article. If you know better, let me know. I do not think that two examples of other cities are enough to establish a precident for all cities. I suggest the following to you. If you hate it the way it is and it is overly important to you and makes you unhappy, just change it back. That would make sure that we are not over-discussing every little tiny detail. This is one big problem here on Wikipedia, instead of contributing useful content, some people prefer to discuss unimportant details over and over. Yawn! Scribner, you might have to much time at your hands, do something useful with it! doxTxob \ ^talk 20:41, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

There is a rule, DoxTxob, that when you make major changes to an article to make note of them on the article talk page, which you failed to do. The specific edit you made made no reference whatsoever to moving the section, not even a mention in the Edit summary box. Learn and follow the basics of editing. I've restored the crime section to this article.--Scribner (talk) 21:48, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I made a change to the crime section, removing an unsupported claim that the rise in crime might be caused by gang recruitment and/or a drop in federal funding. I spent (wasted?) a good bit of time over two days trying to find support for that, or even someone making an unsupported statement in the news about it, but finally the best discussion I could find about the crime jump in 2005 was the story in the Atlantic Monthly, so I gave a one-line summary of one point from the article. It's a very interesting article, and perhaps provides more good information about Memphis. Probably some of it could be used in this article, if you're interested in pursuing that.

That said, in response to the above comment, perhaps the crime section should be a policing or public safety section, since it's a subtopic of government ("crime" doesn't seem to be a subtopic of government -- well, depending on your point of view :-)). While I was doing the above-mentioned research I found a bunch of government initiatives to reduce crime, in addition to those mentioned, that should be mentioned as well.

Anyway, as a one-time Memphis resident and Memphis fan, this is a good article, thanks to everyone for their work on it. Ngriffeth (talk) 19:45, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

FedEx picture

An editor has taken objection to the picture of a fedex plane flying who knows where. We all know FedEx is the largest employer in Memphis, and an image in the economy section is very appropriate. Could someone provide a Fed-Ex image that is actually in Memphis? Jacona (talk) 22:19, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

I did in fact look on Commons for a pic at Memphis International Airport, but didn't find one immediately. I have now added one that I hope is suitable. - BilCat (talk) 22:56, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

You added a random photo of a FedEx gas tank in some random field in Memphis. Just because FedEx is a large employer in Memphis doesn't mean we should add low-quality photos to this great article. Request a photo from other editors, or drive to Memphis and take a picture. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:03, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

You wanted a local pic. So anyway, I did find one of aircraft at MEM. It wasn't in the category for MEM on Commons, but a little extra searching found one. It's a ground pic, and only shows aircraft, not a facility, so you'll probably remove that one too. Sigh. - BilCat (talk) 23:11, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Interestingly, the previous photo of the FedEx aircraft had been in "this great article" since at least January 2009! I honestly don't see why it had to be removed today after having been in the article so long. - BilCat (talk) 23:27, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

I deleted the picture of the FedEx planes at the Memphis airport. It was a picture of FedEx planes only, and showed nothing of the Memphis airport, or of Memphis, which is, after all, the topic of this article. If you cannot find any photos of FedEx which enhance the reader's understanding of Memphis, then just leave it empty. Please also note the following, which comes from the Wikipedia essay WP:IMAGE RELEVANCE: "images must be relevant to the article that they appear in and be significantly and directly related to the article's topic". Please also note the following, which comes from Wikipedia:Image use policy: "images are included in articles to increase the reader's understanding of the subject". Also, "images on Wikipedia should be used in an encyclopedic manner. They should be relevant and increase readers' understanding of the subject matter. In general, images should depict the concepts described in the text of the article". Pictures of airplanes in the sky, airplanes at an unrecognizable airport, or FedEx fuel trucks in a random field, are not relevant to this article. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:35, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm sure the airport photos are recognizable to any one who's been there. The only photo in the article I recognize is the one with the Pyramid, because I've actually seen it from the freeway. Should I remove the rest of the photos because I don't recognize them? Enjoy your block for edit warring - I know I will. - BilCat (talk) 23:52, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

The subject is Memphis. The section is Economy. The picture is of a Fedex plane. FedEx is by far the largest employer in Memphis. FedEx planes have shaped the economy of the city like no other entity in the last 40 years. Seems incredibly appropriate to have an image of a FedEx plane in this article, this section. Calling it "random" doesn't seem right. Jacona (talk) 23:47, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

While I agree with you on the relevance of this photo, being belligerent toward another editor is a terrible idea. While we may not always agree, if you take any time to look at contributions you will find that Magnolia has been a prolific editor, and his edits are in good faith. Jacona (talk) 00:11, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

The picture has been in the article for over SIX years, and it just now needed to be removed? Per BRD, they should have come to the talk page after the first revert, and then waited until we reached a consensus regarding the next step. Continuing to edit war even after I attempted to meet their requirements isn't right. If they keep it up they risk being blocked. - BilCat (talk) 00:45, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

I agree with you on the picture and the approach to resolving the disagreement, but we all need to assume good faith and maintain civility even on those occasions we think another editor is incorrect and unreasonable. Don't make an enemy if you can avoid it, you may need that very editor as a friend someday. Jacona (talk) 01:05, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

I was/am being civil. You should see what I wrote but didn't save! - BilCat (talk) 01:38, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Going back to the left margin. It shouldn't matter how long an error has been in an article, when noticed it should be removed. Could be the article is such great shape that it took this long for the photo to be looked at. Arbitrary photos which don't form a strong tie to where they are in an article should be removed (preferably replaced). Regarding civility, I wholeheartedly concur that discussions should remain civil. Looking back on these comments, unless some have been deleted, this is a pretty civil discussion, on both sides. Just my .02. Happy editing, everyone.Onel5969 (talk) 01:48, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Timeline of Memphis, Tennessee

What is missing from the city timeline? Please add relevant content. Thank you. -- M2545 (talk) 11:07, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Memphis, Tennessee. 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/20140629141530/http://www.cbu.edu/~mcondren/MRP/MemphisCentralStation/MemphisCentralStation.htm to http://www.cbu.edu/~mcondren/MRP/MemphisCentralStation/MemphisCentralStation.htm

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: 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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:23, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Memphis, Tennessee. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://online.king.edu/news/all-about-tennessees-fortune-500-companies/

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: 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:34, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Page switch

This page should be moved to Memphis, with Memphis, Tennessee becoming the redirect. The reason is because there is currently no Memphis page, it's just a redirect, and it would make more sense to switch the pages. Don't really wanna explain further, but you guys should get it. 173.68.25.111 (talk) 19:38, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Eradication of Yellow Fever

Memphisdan put in an edit that claimed drainage of Gayoso Bayou in the 20th Century was responsible for eradication of yellow fever. I have done extensive research on this and found it was rather the George E. Waring, Jr.-designed separated sewer system (which kept Gayoso Bayou constantly flowing, rather than being drained. The Bayou still exists, but flows underground.). The sewer system was constructed about 1880, before the charter was restored, and the economy of this system, which was state-of-the-art at the time, allowed the financially-strapped city to build it. I posted this information in the Waring article with citations from several books for these facts (Google books access to 19th Century engineering journals was invaluable). The info in the Waring article is linked in the History of Memphis, Tennessee article. Maybe I should place more of this information in the latter? --Zeamays (talk) 07:20, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

I'll not disagree if you have done this research. Bigger point is, re-chartered Memphis vowed to always consider water, drainage and public health. A major tunnel/cistern was located beneath my old shop at 1316 Madison. Building the new trolley line (worth a story in itself) the city dug a huge hole in front and rebuilt that tunnel as needed. City engineer also said We have no good drawings downtown of the pipes and lines belowground, so this hole was also exploratory surgery. (Citing Glen Cammack of Speaker Services.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Memphisdan (talk • contribs) 17:10, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Construction of the Memphis sewer system began in January 1880, and the original design was completed in 1884. (See Troesken, Werner "Water, Race, and Disease" The MIT Press, 2004. --Zeamays (talk) 01:03, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

If the Gayoso bayou was "placed underground." it effectively ceased being a swampy ground feature contributing to the mosquito menace. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Memphisdan (talk • contribs) 18:22, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Memphis, Tennessee. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080101160345/http://zip4.usps.com/zip4/citytown.jsp to http://zip4.usps.com/zip4/citytown.jsp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927040837/http://www.memphislibrary.lib.tn.us/history/memphis2.htm to http://www.memphislibrary.lib.tn.us/history/memphis2.htm
• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/69hd5KAIE?url=http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0076/twps0076.html to http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0076/twps0076.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140522161634/http://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2013/SUB-EST2013-3.html to http://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2013/SUB-EST2013-3.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101105133341/http://msje.org/history/archive/tn/HistoryofOrthodoxCongregations.htm to http://www.msje.org/history/archive/tn/HistoryofOrthodoxCongregations.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110615000102/http://www.morganquitno.com/cit07pop.htm to http://www.morganquitno.com/cit07pop.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.utmem.edu/dentistry/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090825064009/http://www.iwr.usace.army.mil/ndc/wcsc/pdf/inlandport03f.pdf to http://www.iwr.usace.army.mil/ndc/wcsc/pdf/inlandport03f.pdf

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) 16:43, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Memphis, Tennessee. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100615184656/http://cityofmemphis.org/framework.aspx?page=296 to http://www.cityofmemphis.org/framework.aspx?page=296
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100716122221/http://mlgw.com/SubView.php?key=about_ourutilservices to http://mlgw.com/SubView.php?key=about_ourutilservices
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120418034514/http://www.airports.org/cda/aci_common/display/main/aci_content07_c.jsp?zn=aci&cp=1-5-212-219-227_666_2__ to http://www.airports.org/cda/aci_common/display/main/aci_content07_c.jsp?zn=aci&cp=1-5-212-219-227_666_2__
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100307052924/http://www.portofmemphis.com/about.asp to http://www.portofmemphis.com/about.asp

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) 09:22, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Memphis, Tennessee. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150207204337/http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/47/4748000.html to http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/47/4748000.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100609203234/http://worldwide.erau.edu/campuses-online/memphis.html to http://worldwide.erau.edu/campuses-online/memphis.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120427115854/http://www.iata.org/ps/publications/pages/wats-freight-km.aspx to http://www.iata.org/ps/publications/Pages/wats-freight-km.aspx

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) 18:40, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Crime Free Memphis Round 2

I believe this portion needs to be removed. The citations are either out of date, non-existent, or are unreliable sources compared to updated government data and should not be used as a reference. Further, there is another wiki page devoted to Memphis Crime that is updated. The current section is redundant as well as placed incorrectly considering this is nested under law and government. Creating it as its own section does not seem to alleviate this when you remove the information that is either no longer cited or doesn't add value as a reference. Deleting it doesn't rid the site of the information either but does improve this page. Considering this is outdated, redundant and does not aid the article as a whole I think it needs to be removed and a reference to the page on Memphis crime be added. Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Memphis901Trae (talk • contribs) 17:29, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

At the very least, the section heading and {{main}} template should remain to point to the separate article, followed by a summary of the major points of that article. You have not been doing that; you were removing the entire section wholesale, including the template, and were (and still are) dangerously close to a warning for edit warring. Wait until others, particularly @Tornado chaser, have weighed in. General Ization ^Talk 17:47, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Nothing has been done but this article still makes no sense. All of the material on it is outdated. This looks very bad. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.162.169.162 (talk) 17:40, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

@General Ization this needs to be fixed. I'm not editing it because you will not approve it but this is a very poor piece to this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.162.169.162 (talk) 21:14, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Memphis, Tennessee. 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:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.econ.brown.edu/fac/glenn_Loury/louryhomepage/teaching/Ec%20222/Atlantic%20article%20public%20housing%20and%20crime%20in%20Memphis.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110725173700/http://www.cityofmemphis.org/framework.aspx?page=146 to http://www.cityofmemphis.org/framework.aspx?page=146
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150221194549/http://columbialawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/47_Anderson.pdf to http://columbialawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/47_Anderson.pdf

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) 15:57, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Interstate 22

Interstate 22 doesn't even enter Tennessee, why is it listed as one of the interstates in Memphis? Certainly it is part of the Memphis MSA, but it's miles away from the city. Should it really be listed as part of the city's highway system? I understand that it will likely reach the city limits in the future, but it does not at the moment, so shouldn't the article reflect that? Sedriskell (talk) 23:59, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Revert

If United Pentecostal Church International name has changed as ip states in this edit summary [7] the main article should be updated to reflect the change. It should not be accomplished by altering the link to the article for a general denomination.Dartslilly (talk) 18:27, 18 July 2019 (UTC)  

Geography

Can someone please update the October record high temperature please. Thanks! On October 3, 2019, Memphis reached a high temperature of 98°F. Flying Pig 1115 (talk) 02:12, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Primary topic

I would actually dispute that the primary topic of Memphis is Memphis, Tennessee. For non-Americans, I don't think this is a well-known city at all. I always knew Memphis exclusively as the ancient capital of Egypt until around the middle of high school which was when I first heard that there was a city in Tennessee by that name. Obviously people's experiences will differ depending on what subjects they're interested in. Someone fascinated by world history would more likely think of Memphis, Egypt while someone fascinated by American music and the politics might hear of Memphis, Tennessee first. I would argue that there is no primary topic for Memphis; I don't think Memphis is that well-known at all outside the United States. Even as a Californian, I almost never hear of this place and more often hear of Memphis, Egypt as one might talk of ancient Rome, Chang'an, or Kyoto. This is not to downplay the significance of Memphis, Tennessee as the site of Martin Luther King, Jr.'s assassination or its role in the Civil Rights Movement, only that I am skeptical of its global notability. Sol Pacificus (talk) 19:52, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

I live in the US and had wondered the same thing. It would be informative I think if someone not in Egypt or the US would give us some G-hit numbers. John from Idegon (talk) 20:14, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

I live near Tennessee, but not near Memphis. (Tennessee is a long state.) I'd agree that there probably is no primary topic. The last move discussion on Talk:Memphis (disambiguation) was held over 8 years ago, so it may be time to try again. As an aside, I'd like to see discussions regarding primary topic moves changed so that "no consensus" results in there being no primary topic. The inability to decide if there is a primary topic or not is pretty much proof that there is no primary topic. - BilCat (talk) 20:30, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Now at Talk:Memphis (disambiguation)#Requested move 4 September 2018. Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:02, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

There is now a new RM at Talk:Memphis, Egypt#Requested move 12 October 2020 proposing to make the Egyptian city primary. Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:57, 12 October 2020 (UTC)