Jump to content

Talk:Daphne, Alabama

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

untitled

[edit]

Wondering how to edit this U.S. City Entry?
The WikiProject U.S. Cities standards might help.

Recreation

[edit]

If anyone has additional info on the parks and recreations section please jump in. I got it started. Probably need a cultural section too. If I don't get it soon, maybe you guys can start it. JBEvans 01:30, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For Daphne, Fairhope and Spanish Fort, would it not be wise to notate in a cultural section that they all celebrate Mardi Gras? --Mnemnoch 17:52, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Bay Minette as County Seat

[edit]

I thought that the original story was that the records were stored in Daphne and stolen. During the process, they were taken to Bay Minette. I need to drive up to the historic Methodist Church near Bayside and check the signage as I believe this is a fact. --Mnemnoch 17:52, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are correct, at least that's what I have heard. In those days, the county seat was wherever the records were. I think the legislature later validated the location of the county seat but the theft is also the story I have heard. We should be able to verify it somewhere. JodyB yak, yak, yak 18:05, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is listed on http://www.daphneal.com/history.asp and I've edited the article accordingly until I can find further research on it.--Mnemnoch 00:37, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Commuter town

[edit]

I fail to see how Daphne is a commuter town as it has no public carpooling services, major public transportation, or likewise. Even though US Highway 98 meets I-10 and goes through Daphne, this doesn't mean that it's a thoroughfare for a "bedroom town". Much like other cities around it, Daphne has supported other cities around it throughout the 19th Century and have all been cities have been independently successful. --Mnemnoch 04:35, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mayor's Business??

[edit]

Is it necessary to name the business owned by the mayor? It has no particular standing of its own and seems a little like a commercial nod. Any thoughts? JodyB talk 22:06, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I concur and have made a revision to this. Mnemnoch (talk) 02:53, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Education section revision

[edit]

I don't think the education section looks very good. What would you think of removing the sub-sections and bringing everything into one or two paragraphs? JodyB talk 03:50, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • I went ahead and made some changes to clean it up so it wouldn't look so fractured. I hope it meets your standards. 13:04, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Good Article Review

[edit]

I am nominating this article for review as a Good Article. I am at the point where I think a review would help figure out where to go from here. My goal is to one day take this to Featured Article status but that is a long way away. Any thoughts or edits from anyone is helpful. Thanks! JodyB talk 19:30, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Daphne, Alabama/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sportsguy17 (talk · contribs) 02:10, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will be reviewing this article. Feel free to leave comments and/or suggestions below. Sportsguy17 :) (click to talk • contributions) 02:10, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If this article is going to pass this one, it's going to need a lot more references. The European exploration and settlement section is unreferenced and I see only one reference in the Native American History section. If the refs verify more of the content than it currently shows to be now, then use <ref name="..."/> so you can show it supports the given content. In the Geography section, the paragraphs about topography and nearby communities are unreferenced. And for the third section, I only see one reference over three large paragraphs. For now, try and reference these three. However, I will not be very active the next few days. We can either place this on hold or fail it, allow for you to make changes (and enjoy your thanksgiving ), and then once more references are added, you can put it up for review again. Best, Sportsguy17 :) (click to talk • contributions) 02:24, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Let's just put it on hold. I will have some time this weekend to work on the particulars you mentioned. I'll message you when I am ready for you to take a look again. Thanks. JodyB talk 03:50, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 2013 update

[edit]

I have added references as suggested. I'm unclear exactly what is expected in terms of sourcing for the nearby communities. A link to a map? I added a reference in which the various communities are mentioned but it seems to me that is not something needing referencing. Other sections concerning topography and geography I am working on and expect to be done later this week. The demographic section is all sourced from the U.S. Census bureau but I need to add the actual citations and update to the most recent numbers. I'll do that this week too. I'm out of the country beginning December 9 and will not return until about the 20th. I will not have access to the internet until I return. So please place on hold if you cannot pass it (after my mentioned additions, of course). Thanks! JodyB talk 12:33, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See below for what's strong and what needs work (I'm giving you a detailed and a broad overview):

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality, no copyvios, spelling and grammar:
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. Has an appropriate reference section:
    B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

So we are closer, but not quite there yet. Again, the lead of History and the Native American History subsection could use more sources. It has large chunks of details that lack sources. Lets start here, and I'm going to bed, as in the Eastern Time Zone, its 21:53 and I'm tired, I will be picking up where I left off tomorrow. Best and sorry for the delayed response. Sportsguy17 (talk • contribs • sign) 03:53, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much. I'm afraid I will be away for a couple of weeks. I will be without internet access from tomorrow until just before Christmas. Let's leave it on hold until I return and can do some more work on it. The native american links are proving a challenge but they are there, I just need to dig them out. So thanks for your help and I will talk to you soon. JodyB talk 08:53, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Enjoy some time off. If another editor can pick up on it, they can fill in. If not, the article will just take a vacation too. Either way, it'll remain on hold and enjoy your break. Sportsguy17 (talk • contribs • sign) 02:51, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well the best laid plans...an expired passport wrecked my trip so I am here and have some time. See if the history lead is more suitable. After your last comment I added some more detail and sources. I'm tackling this one piece at a time. Thanks for your help. JodyB talk 02:58, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oh no! I am so sorry to hear of this. Good to see you working on the sections and they are now good. My next and only remaining sections of concerns are Demographics, Education, and Transportation, all of which should be able to be sourced pretty easily. Otherwise, sourcing-wise, everything looks alright. Sportsguy17 (T • C) 15:18, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Perfect! The education section should be easy because I have been assembling some information about the local Board of Education. One question about demographics. Should I stick with 2010 actual numbers or use 2012 estimates. I am inclined to stay with the 2010 numbers. Your thoughts would be appreciated. JodyB talk 17:59, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the 2010 official statistics. The 2012 estimates seem somewhat WP:CRYSTALish. If you wish to add it to your sandbox in case official statistics. Also, good to here with the education section. Keep up the good work. I'll check the reference and mechanics (spelling, grammar, etc.) of the article. Thanks. Sportsguy17 (T • C) 18:42, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

JodyB sorry for not responding, how is it going with the changes? Sportzilla | ROARR!! 02:53, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sportzilla More to do, been slower going than I thought but I am still assembling material. JodyB talk 03:11, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


I hate to do this, but I'm failing the article for now. This may come to shock, but there still is a lot to be covered and this article has been on hold for over a month. First, I still have concerns to bring up and I want you to have time to organize your thoughts and content. Then, when you're ready, feel free to ping me and we can pick up, but its not fair to anyone to have this specific GA review fail, but it's just not there yet. I'm one to not give up on something, but its not time for it to pass. Trust me, continue working on getting the content together, adding it, and then I'll bring up a few more concerns when I have time on my hands. I'm sorry, and best of wishes. Sportzilla | ROARR!! 03:45, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tomorrow, I will leave my final thoughts on what needs to be improved. I have complete confidence in you and the article that it is not far from GA. Best, Sportzilla | ROARR!! 03:49, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I understand completely. I'll be watching for your comments. Thanks for your help. JodyB talk 13:46, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Abu Mansoor Al-Amriki

[edit]

Abu Mansoor Al-Amriki has been listed as a notable person in the Daphne, Alabama article for a very long time. Recently, a user has decided to remove him stating that he was not really notable and wasn't really from Daphne. [1] I disagree. The Washington Post reports that he was a commander in a particularly brutal terrorist group and that he had earned "a spot on the FBI's list of most-wanted terrorists and a $5 million bounty on his head." (September 13, 2013). I would suggest that makes him notable in any discussion. The same Washington Post report says "Amriki was raised in Daphne, Ala." In addition, the subject has a page on Wikipedia which shows him as coming from Daphne. In addition, he was the Class President at Daphne High School. I suggest he should be returned to the article. JodyB talk 21:26, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Daphne, Alabama. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 18:16, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Daphne, Alabama. 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) 19:26, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Daphne,_Alabama&oldid=1195425178"