Talk:Nolita

Latest comment: 5 years ago by Kops2222

As a New Yorker, to say that this a biased article is ridiculous. There is nothing wrong with a neighborhood nickname. Just as Manhattan is a suitable name for the New York County and even the original New York City, a neighborhood can have more than one nickname, and the borders for one nickname can overlap another. As a Wikipedia editor, the biased tab on this article is perplexing and should be removed. I have read the arguments as to why the bias tag was inserted, but I do not agree at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kops2222 (talkcontribs) 17:05, 19 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Requested move

edit
The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was move Anthony Appleyard (talk) 21:57, 2 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

"Nolita" already redirects here; the disambiguator ("Manhattan") not needed. Change case per WP:MOSCAPS: "For proper names and trademarks that are given in mixed or non-capitalization by their owners (such as k.d. lang, adidas and others), follow standard English text formatting and capitalization rules." Press and common usage also follows this format. The target name format matches that of other neighborhoods listed at Template:Manhattan.

Related move requests at Garment District, Manhattan, SoHo, and TriBeCa. — AjaxSmack 23:57, 28 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Survey

edit
Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

Discussion

edit
Any additional comments:

I don't advocate relying on this but a perusal of the hated Google Hits test results shows a rough ranking of "Nolita," "NoLita," and then "NoLITa." — AjaxSmack 20:40, 29 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

"NOrthern Little Italy"

edit

An editor added a cite for "Nolita" standing for "Northern Little Italy" rather than "North of Little Italy", but I have moved this information to a footnote. Although the cite is correct, the information comes from the Italian American Museum, whioch has reason to be biased in this matter. Little Italy has been losing ground for years to an ever-expanding Chinatown, and to have a section of the neighborhood hived off into a new mini-neighborhood like Nolita is a blow to the old neighborhoods prestige. This they seem to be trying to reclaim by calling it "Northern Little Italy," when, in fact, the whole reason a new neighborhood was generated was that it had its own, new personality, separate from Little Italy's, hence the geographic name "North of Little Italy". I'll be adding cites to support this shortly, but that is the basic situation. Beyond My Ken (talk) 14:48, 6 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Nolita. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:23, 9 December 2017 (UTC)Reply