Jump to content

Talk:Albuquerque, New Mexico/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

Reverting changes

I think it's generally considered bad wiki form to repeatedly change the same page in the space of scant minutes. If you've made a mistake, revert it and correct it. Someone may want to clean up Sammo's mess.

And is that directed towards me? If so, you are blaming the wrong dude... Do not take this the wrong but I think it official wiki policy to freely edit an article. It states that "If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, do not submit it." Heck, it happened to me several times now and I am fine with it {lol}. Good job by the way. I really like what you did with it. Dino

Elevation

I think I know where the source of confusion for Albuquerque's elevation came from. The elevation of the Albuquerque Internation Sunport (ABQ or KABQ) is officially 5352 feet. The airport, however, is way above most of the city. It's located on a high mesa a good deal above downtown (where many cities record their official elevations) and above a large portion of the city (I can see the airport from my house, and it's up the "hill" so to speak) and definitely far above the valley and west mesa areas of the city which are MUCH lower in elevation than the airport. 5280 is the general consensus of Albuquerque residents and is pretty close to the average. Unless you can cite the USGS for other elevations, we should leave ~5280 feet as the elevation of the city. --ABQCat 07:04, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I have cited another source. No confusion here... Also, living in Albuquerque and a few blocks from the Sunport (Cornell and Coal), I have never noticed the airport as being elevation as being an anomaly. In fact, I find such an elevation to be slightly closer to the lower end. The highest parts of the city are towards Juan Tabo and Tramway. Have you ever rode a bike on Indian school east of Tramway and then rode back down towards UNM? It is not easy going up there... I have done the same from UNM to the valley. I have also walked down to the valley and up to the Heights when I was low on bus money {lol}. I think that this estimate is more accurate. 5280 is a round figure, as it is a mile, which is probably the reason for the acceptance. It is also the official elevation for Denver, Colorado. Take care friend... Dino Bryant dinobrya@yahoo.com (UNM Class of '98).
One thing. http://www.google.com/search?q=albuquerque+%22average+elevation might show you that the elevation of the city is hard to come by, and averages range all over the place. Let's list facts. Average elevation would consist of some sort of average of the elevation over the entire city. I doubt that's how the number which was previously cited was come by. If the city lists it, or USGS lists it, I'm fine with it. The CVB lists the range, kudos on that find. If we're citing average, however, I'd need to see a real citation from the city or from USGS. --ABQCat 03:35, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I think this is an excellent compromise. Say do they ever talk about A.J. Bramlett in Wildcat country? I think he went to La Cueva. Dino

Colorado Springs has an average elevation of 6,008 feet and has a population of about 370,000 which classifies it as a major city. This statement "Interestingly, Albuquerque has the highest altitude of any major city in the United States." is inaccurate.

Ok, perhaps there's some technical definition of "major city" we're both unfamiliar with. The statement may not be inaccurate but rather imprecise. I've restored the comment with a qualifier "one of the highest elevations of any major city in the United States". If someone can point to a technical definition of "major city" which would support the original wording, by all means change it back. --ABQCat 09:47, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Whatever . . . Personally I do not consider Colorado Springs as a major city but I will let you have it. I will make minor revision by adding "enough".

Where did the 4500 figure for the Rio Grande come from? I'd always heard over 4800 ft.--Silverback 07:54, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I when to topozone.com and looked at the Rio Grande towards the south end of the city, where the lowest elevation should be, and I estimate it at about 4920ft. --Silverback 08:08, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for taking the time to check a decent topo map. I had been looking off and on for a good source for that 4500 ft for a while now (I didn't quite believe it either - ~2000 feet of elevation gain IN the city?). --ABQCat 16:13, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Traditionally, the "location" of a city that's used for distances and elevations has been the main post office, which is usually close to the center of town. Since the base has limited southern growth here, growth has tended, until recently, to be north and east, out of the valley and towards the mountains. (BTW, Tramway and Tramway is *much* higher than the airport. And so is Rio Rancho.)

FWIW, my house, near Old Town, is at about 4650', and the base of the Tram is about 6200', so a 2000' difference within the city limits isn't out of the range of possibility, just improbable. But the most important measurement, by far, is at University and Avenida de Cesar Chavez: "A Mile High, and Louder Than Hell!" User:68.35.160.2 07:43, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

anon one, I think you must be mistaken about the elevation of your house, even several miles to the south the river is still above 4800 ft and that should be lower than your elevation, which must be higher than the river. If you follow the river to the southern city limits, the topomaps seem to show an elevation of 4920 feet, but that requires some interpolation, so I rounded down to 4900. You might want to follow the topomaps linked to in the article to find the elevation at your house.--Silverback 08:12, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
Old town appears to be at about 4960ft elevation.--Silverback 08:18, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
I stand corrected. I consulted both the linked map at topomaps and the US Geological Survey website, and they both show a range from 4900 to 6000 feet within the city limits. I wonder where Google Earth (the source of my claim) gets their numbers, since there's nothing north of Socorro that low. Weird.
FWIW the USGS shows Old Town and my house at exactly 5000 feet using their "best source". User:148.177.69.211 22:45, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

I reverted the addition of the "one of the highest metropolitan areas in the country," for the following reasons. (1) It is redundant with info already in the geography section. (2) It is imprecise. (3) It is unsourced. (4) "Metropolitan area" is itself vague, and if one uses the whole Metropolitan statistical area, you have to include four counties (!). It would be interesting to see an accurate average elevation for either (a) the city itself or (b) the city plus Rio Rancho, Corrales, etc. (carefully specified). But as mentioned above, that info is hard to come by. -- Spireguy 19:05, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Too Much Space at the top

Could someone please eliminate the large void that exist between the first and second section. I do not know how to do it. User:129.118.160.36 07:51, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

  • I don't see "alot" of space. What resolution settings do you have? Are you talking about after this paragraph:

"The city hosts the Albuquerque International Balloon Fiesta every October. The Albuquerque International Balloon Fiesta started in 1972."

Before the table of contents? WikiDon 08:38, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

I guess you're right. It seemed like a lot of space last night. Yes, I was talking about that paragraph. User:129.118.160.30 22:28, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

I had the toughest time editing the page, I thought I did it before I added the note, but then I re-checked and the changes weren't there. It kept bombing on me, I had to try about four times, then broke the changes up into segments. Frustrating.

Famous Albuquerqueans

Please review the list List of famous people from Albuquerque first before adding new names.

I added most of the names from the previous list to the linked page, but I'm not sure whether to add Lance Ringnald or not, since he only moved to Albuquerque two years before the Olympics to train, and I don't think he stuck around. User:148.177.69.211 23:09, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
........ah......NO. WikiDon
Gee, thanks! You have a way with words. :)
About Mike Judge - I was of the understanding that he attended St Pius (a local catholic) High School, not Highland - I went to Highland and remember seeing articles in some local news source as a highschooler that put Judge as an alumnus of St Pius, not Highland. Unfortunately I don't have a definite source. Anyone else have info on this? I always thought it was a bit interesting, seeing that while Highland High exists in Albuquerque, is the school Beavis and Butthead attend, and Mike Judge attended high school here, that he actually attended (of all other places) the private Catholic High school in town and came to be known for a product such as Beavis and Butthead.

This certainly isn't a solid source, but someone I used to work with at Sandia (who went to Highland, as I did) said he and Mike Judge went to middle school together but that Judge went to St Pius for high school. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zia kc (talk • contribs) 07:03, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Neutrality?

"The southwest area is currently undergoing rapid development. The traditional small farms and ranches are being replaced by modern "cookie-cutter" subdivisions and "big box" retail stores. In 2004, Wal-Mart began construction of a new super center on the site of a former dairy farm."

This paragraph, which was at the end of the Southwest quadrant section, seems pretty one-sided to me, not NPOV. I'm not certain my replacement paragraph (below) is much better, but it's probably OK. Any thoughts?

"The southwest area is currently undergoing rapid and controversial development, including large retail stores and quickly-built subdivisions."

--Oddtoddnm 02:09, August 4, 2005 (UTC)

You're right; the original paragraph is biased. And wrong. I've lived here for over thirty years, and I can tell you that the South Valley (where all the "ranches" and "farms" are, isn't being "quickly replaced" by anything. If development is *finally* happening west of Old Coors, it's replacing shrubs and brush, not farms.

Besides, that Walmart was stopped, thanks to lots of people who didn't want the traffic it would have represented.

The Southwest quadrant may be growing, but it's not rapid. Controversial, maybe, but that's to be anticipated, given that a large portion of Albuquerque doesn't want anything to change. Ever.

Your replacement paragraph is better as

"The southwest area is currently undergoing increasing development, including new retail stores and subdivisions." User:68.35.160.2 07:53, 16 September 2005 (UTC) well to tell u the truth noboday really cares....only people that do unevercity

Petroglyphs

The existence and destruction of the petroglyphs should be mentioned -- thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.173.35.170 (talk) 20:43, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

History

I have been a life long resident of Albuquerque and have never heard or used the term "new town." User:140.32.16.104 20:32, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

  • How long have you lived here? Have you studied the history of ABQ? If you lived here in 1885 you might have refered to the area around Central & the ATS&F train tracks as "new town".
    • TRY:
      • Simmons, Marc. Albuquerque: A Narrative History. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1982.
      • Johnson, Byron and Robert Dauner. Early Albuquerque: A Photographic History, 1870-1918. Albuquerque: The Albuquerque Journal and The Albuquerque Museum, 1981.
See also: History Resources @ the City of ABQ's Albuquerque Museum

WikiDon 22:14, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

What is the literal translation of the Navajo name? Does it pre-date the spanish name? That would seem suprising, wouldn't that mean it is really the Navajo name for a nearby pueblo? How does it differ from the pueblo names for the area? The pueblo names would seem more apropo.--Silverback 23:40, September 1, 2005 (UTC)

The Navajo only entered the area about 100-150 years before the Spanish, so while any Navajo name might be older than the Spanish name, pueblo names would certainly have precedent. - DDN User:68.35.160.2 07:29, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
While the Navajo and Pueblo names might be more appropriate, the fact is that Albuququerque was founded as a Spanish outpost, therefore there was no name for the area before then.
There was no name for the Spanish settlement before there was a Spanish Settlement. The Navajo People do not live in Pueblos and like the Puebloan Peoples, have ties to the Pre-Puebloan people of the area, sometimes called the Anasasi or Anasazi.
If the city was never the location of a Navajo settlement, and the nearest Native American settlements were not Navajo, then what's the point of including the Navajo name at all?128.165.87.144 (talk) 20:59, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Major Buildings

The list of tall buildings in Albuquerque is limited to downtown. I can guarantee that the former First National Bank building (Central & San Mateo) is taller than the new courthouses downtown, and I'd put money on the fact that the Uptown Marriott is, too. User:68.35.160.2 07:35, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

  • $1000? No, I wouldn't bet that much on very many things. But I would be reasonably surprised that a 17-story building would be less than 167 feet tall. Do you have a reference? (I didn't make the connection to the Bank of the West tower, which is why I put my comment in the discussion, rather than just editing the page. Obviously, I was wrong.) User:148.177.69.211 22:04, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
      • Okay, $100? Think about it this way: A courthouse useally has higher ceilings than a office building, and even more than a hotel. Some court rooms are known to have 30-foot ceilings. But a lot of modern hotels, an average man in height can touch the ceiling in their room. So, at 8-feet, versus an office building which is normally 10-15, and a courthouse at 20-feet per floor, plus useally some type of dome-shaped cap at the top.
        • Pete V. Domenici United States Courthouse 7-floors 176 feet (54 m)
        • Albuquerque Marriott 17-floors 156 feet (48)
Huh. Neat. But still surprising. You win. Yeay, you!!
And hey, it's "usually". Cheers!
I just wanted to say I haven't laughed at anything on wikipedia as much as this thread...--N88819 (talk) 06:10, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Merging Trivia and Culture and technology

It would seem these two categories should merge, as both of them share information that would fit into the other's category.--Metron4 19:09, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

VOTE: NO A "trivia" section in a Wikipedia article is about the entire article. It could include trvia questions about economy, geography, history, any category. Technology should be MOVED under economy. To conform to other articles, it has more to with the economy, the economic and historical growth, than the culture. The culture of all cities and towns can be, and are, influenced by the major economic engines of that individual place, but that doesn't mean that they belong in that category. Seattle is influenced by fishing, timber, Boeing, and now Microsoft, and those things filter down into the culture of places like Pikes Place Market, only the by-products of the economic engines need to be in culture. Well, that is my take. WikiDon 02:31, 29 September 2005 (UTC)ee
Agreed. Perhaps the "Looney Tunes" reference should be moved to trivia, and the Microsoft trivia note moved, with Technology, to Economy.--Metron4 17:25, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

History 1800-1850

Anonymous User:62.178.90.36 made a request that something be added about the period from 1800 to 1850, more importantly the Mexican-American War 1846-1848. WikiDon 18:12, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Paragraph or List?

1) Do you like "sister cities" in paragraph:

Albuquerque has nine sister cities, as designated by Sister Cities International, Inc. (SCI): Ashgabat (Turkmenistan), Chihuahua (Mexico), Gijon (Spain), Helmstedt (Germany), Lanzhou (China), Sasebo (Japan), Guadalajara (Mexico), Hua Lien (Taiwan), and Alburquerque (Spain).


2) Or list form:

Albuquerque has nine sister cities, as designated by Sister Cities International, Inc. (SCI):


Which is easier to read and decipher faster?

WikiDon 21:41, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Personally I find the paragraph version to be cluttered and difficult to read, and prefer the list version. There's nothing lost by using a list to organize the information, really, and the gain is in readability and visibility. --ABQCat 07:33, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
It seems the reasons for reversion to the paragraph form were aesthetics and consistancy amongst other city articles. I'd say the first is a matter of individual taste that perhaps should be voted upon rather than unilaterally decided, and the second is interesting but following a convention which clutters (in my opinion, unnecessarily) a simple list of cities doesn't make sense either. Any other thoughts? --ABQCat 07:36, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
First of all, I don't appreciate the public defamation and attacks by WikiDon on my character. This was unnecessary and unacceptable. I never intended to start a flame/edit war over this. As far as scientifically looking at all city articles to see which ones are list form vs. prose form, is really unfair because it seems like a lot of articles start out with lists of things and are eventually rewritten into a prose format at a later time, once more information is obtained and can be written. So I am not surprised that the majority of articles contain sister city information written out in a list format.
However, the Wikipedia:Manual of Style, in particular, the part concerning embedded lists, prefers the prose format versus list format if the list is within the article itself. Lists as separate, linked articles/pages, are the preferred format here. So this is what guided me in changing the sister cities sections to prose format. Furthermore, there is some interesting discussion on lists within city articles on the archived featured article votes for several city articles, which seem to prefer prose format as well: Louisville, San Jose, and Seattle. Although there is some interesting debate on lists vs. prose in these articles, with lists being acceptable in some cases, the general consensus appears to still be going towards the prose format.
In general, I prefer the prose format for the sister cities information, as it makes the article a bit tighter with requiring less vertical scrolling. There's also less white space to the right of the list, which in my opinion, makes the article look better as well. If there's a really long list, then perhaps the list should be migrated to its own page and listed there, with a link under See Also.

--Dr. Cash 17:41, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

To draw to some sort of compromise here, I've listed the sister cities as two columns, to eliminate some of the whitespace to the right of the list. That way, the list isn't quite as far down and still allows for easier reading. I've also re-alphabetized the list as well. Dr. Cash 20:31, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
SIR! What gives you the right to make the final decision? Why do you, and you alone, get to chose what format is going to be used? Are you the Wikigod? Are you the self appointed Wikichief in charge of sister cities? You have ONE vote just like everyone else. Instead of changing first, why don’t you try discussion first and change second?
You can propose your new idea at Wikipedia_talk:Lists#Paragraph_or_List.3F and then we all can vote. But, do not, I repeat DO NOT, think that what you want is what everyone wants.
Your arrogance really chaps my hide and pisses me off. WikiDon 20:49, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
Quite the contrary. Now you, sir, are really beginning to PISS ME OFF!! I'm trying to come to a compromise here, and you still seem to want to argue with me! WTF?!?! Maybe it's time you took a little break, took a little chill pill, and maybe sell your computer and leave the internet if that doesn't work out? We're all supposed to be working together here, and I never said (nor implied) that I am the self-appointed wikigod or wikichief as you think I am. And of course, I might remind you that you're the one that reverted to YOUR PREFERRED TEXT and then initiated the discussion, rather than doing what you just said and started the discussion first before reverting. Dr. Cash 21:42, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

The City Seal

We should change the seal to the new, tricentennial seal. P-unit 06:34, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

I agree with you, and we need to add a section about it. The 300th Birthday deserves some recognition, since not very many places in the country can say they've been around that long! --KelticK<small>{Talk} 06:24, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Nice travel brochure guys

No mention of crime rate, poor public education or anything of that sort.

If you have sources then go ahead and add the material. Cheers, -Willmcw 23:53, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
My impression is that it's pretty safe, with the exception of the Warzone (San Pedro north to Tramway, and Lomas/I-40 east to Kirtland AFB,) and some parts of the South Valley and the West Side south of West Mesa High School. This is not a large portion of the city. My viewpoint may be skewed. I'm one of those people who are blessed with both height and a nasty scowl, so almost everyone leaves me alone. This is all completely anecdotal, of course, and may not be representative of the average persons experience of Albuquerque. I do know there are a hell of a lot of homeless people around UNM, so take that for whatever it's worth. Arkannis 09:57, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

All Ages shows ban?

In the Urban Trends and Issues section, would it be notable to note the Mayor's controversial proposed ban of the sale of alcohol in certain downtown venues during all-ages shows? --Kahlfin 19:41, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Not until/unless it passes. Oh, and hi Joaquin! IMFromKathlene 16:22, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Metro Population

What is the actual population of the metro area? The first paragraph claims around 712,000 while the infobox states that the metro area has over 1 million. What is the actual population? Ajwebb 00:44, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Just looked at most recent census.gov data and it shows ABQ metro population at 797,940 for 2005. Is there another source for the current value of 781,447 or is the larger number just a newer estimate? --Gerberb 16:04, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

The last figure I could find was an estimate for 2004. Where did you find the metro area population for 2005?

Open table B-1 Here, data from the latest State and Metro Area Data Book. Gerberb 21:40, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Article Size

This article is starting to get long. Any ideas/comments on some sections that could be spun off onto their own pages? I was thinking possibly the section on quadrants be rolled into a neighborhoods article(s). Breaking this part off could allow more info on smaller neighborhoods in ABQ w/o making the main article any longer. Other candidates would be schools and the trivia section. Comments? Ideas? Gerberb 19:34, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

The section on quadrants might actually be more applicable for a metro area article, since a lot of that can go into describing the overall metropolitan area and not just the city itself. The education section is also really just a list, and can be condensed quite a bit into prose. The lists of K-12 schools are generally not mentioned directly in city articles, either, and rather as 'see also' type lists. There's also a lot of non-standard sections in this article, where information can be condensed and moved to other, more appropriate sections (e.g. 'Urban trends and issues', 'Interesting Facts', '10 Tallest Buildings in Albuquerque', 'Culture, technology, and popular culture', and 'trivia'). Much of the information in this article seems like just a list of lists of interesting things about ABQ, rather than an encyclopedia article.
For a guide on the suggested format of city articles, please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities. Dr. Cash 06:16, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Cultural Geography

This section makes some fairly broad statements w/o citing references. This information is just belivable enough to warrant discussion, but should really be removed if there is no verifiable data to backup these demographic statements. Any relevant information should be merged with the existing Quadrants section if it is not there already.

You are right, I (author) deleted the section for the time being.

Best Climate?

Just because Albuquerque is dry and sunny, does it really have the "best" climate? What about all the people out there that don't like deserts or dry heat? Maybe there should be reference or a less biased statement.

Saying the climate is "best" is clearly in violation of NPOV. I personally can't stand the dry heat and plan on moving away from NM as soon as I can, but I wouldn't write that the area has the "worst" climate because that violates NPOV too. --Jaberwockynmt 21:27, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Can anyone explain these roads?

http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&z=12&ll=35.283182,-106.7696&spn=0.134803,0.2314&om=1

Why aren't there any houses or any other buildings on them? The area appears to be almost half the size of Albuquerque.--Wikipediatastic

To the best of my knowledge this is just an area of Sandoval County that is currently undergoing development. I think at least some of it is within the Rio Rancho city limits. Camerafiend 22:22, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
Pretty amazing development. Its huge. Is this sort of thing common in the US? --Wikipediatastic 09:01, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
The entire "urban sprawl" thing is becoming a pretty big deal, particularly in the US Southwest. What's terrifying is being a new driver and getting totally lost out there when you have no sense of direction and no idea how to get home...IMFromKathlene 00:13, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
These roads are part of the original massive AMREP pre-development that eventually became Rio Rancho. They are indeed mostly within the Rio Rancho city limits, and the city is slowly growing into the area. The master plan for the city still envisions it taking over all of this area, which will make it as large as the Northeast Heights of Albuquerque. This level of dirt road construction--with actual development much delayed--is not actually common in the US, and in fact the long lapse of time between the initial roads and initial land sales, on one hand, and actual development on the other, led to some lawsuits against AMREP. -- Spireguy 18:47, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Survey on proposal to make U.S. city naming guidelines consistent with others countries

There is a survey in progress at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (settlements) to determine if there is consensus on a proposed change to the U.S. city naming conventions to be consistent with other countries, in particular Canada.

This proposal would allow for this article to be located at Albuquerque instead of Albuquerque, New Mexico, bringing articles for American cities into line with articles for cities such as Paris and Toronto.--DaveOinSF 18:07, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
However the proposal would allow U.S. cities to be inconsistent with the vast majority of other U.S. cities and towns, which (with a few exceptions) all use the "city, state" convention. -Will Beback 23:42, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Mass transit

i believe that a functioning bus/commuter rail system constitutes a title of mass transit not public transit. there are plenty of city articles with the title mass transit that has less routes, etc then ABQ Ride. Urban909

When I edited it, I was under the impression that mass transit meant a higher level of public transit, like rapid transit. However, after looking at the public transit page, I see that mass transit and public transit are interchangeable terms. I'm sorry, I should have really looked into this before editing. :)
However, there is one thing in that article that bring the Rail Runner into question:
"The term transit is less likely to include long-distance forms of public transportation, such as long-distance or commuter railroads, inter-city buses, or intercity railways."
So maybe the Rail Runner should go back under "Rail", and we'll keep "Mass Transit" for ABQRide. PerryPlanet 20:52, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

no worries, thats cool with me. i will do the revision, remove the tag and hopefully Rail Runner will be expanded to Santa Fe and other parts of the city. seeing that i don't live in albuquerque yet (moving back to NM soon though) i hope this expansion will go through, as with the light rail proposal on central. luckily your city seems to be ahead on your transit needs. here in houston, its been an uphill battle for 20 years to even get 7 miles of rail. by the way, do you know how many miles of bus system you have? cheers. Urban909

MIND Institute

The section on the MIND Institute seems like promotion to me. Comments? -- Spireguy 18:48, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Definitely. So much so, that it should be removed. There is no mention of the large number of area hospitals. I'm gonna remove it, also, I'll try to write a comprehensive section on area hospitals sometime this week. Arkannis 09:40, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Merge from Albuquerque Trivia

Please merge any relevant content from Albuquerque Trivia per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Albuquerque Trivia. Thanks. —Quarl (talk) 2007-02-09 09:34Z

New article - Mesa del Sol

Mesa del Sol. Ghoener06 18:26, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Spelling: one/two r's (question about recent revert)

This isn't the world's most pressing issue, but I think that of the following three possibilities, the last is most neutral:

  • emblazoned with the name Alburquerque (with the extra "r")
  • emblazoned with the name Alburquerque (with the 'extra' "r")
  • emblazoned with the name Alburquerque (with two "r"s)

These have all appeared on the page in the "History/Early settlers" section, in that order, with the last being my version, which was just reverted to the second version. The first version seems to be biased toward one r; the second uses scare quotes, which are usually a bad idea: they bring an ironic tone in which is inappropriate. The third version (I think) is purely factual and hence most neutral. Comments? -- Spireguy 20:08, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

History of the name

I found a source that I feel could be used to back some of the statements in the history section Origin of the name Albuquerque (Bernalillo County, New Mexico, USA). Also, I'm interested in noting the two etymological opinions about the name. Should that be added here or at the disambiguation page? Perhaps both is best - someone may be wondering about the greater history of the name while reading about the city. The Behnam 03:46, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:CityoABQ.gif

Image:CityoABQ.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 18:43, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Date of founding of Alburquerque

Albuquerque, New Mexico#Early settlers says,

"The city was founded in 1706 as the Spanish colonial outpost of Alburquerque; ..."

and New Mexico#History says,

"While developing Santa Fe as a trade center, the returning settlers founded the old town of Albuquerque in 1706, ..."

But New Spain#The last Spanish Habsburgs (1643–1713) says,

"The U.S. (modern day New Mexico) town of Alburquerque was founded in 1660, ..."

and History of New Mexico#Spanish Exploration and Colonization says,

"Spanish settlers arrived at the site of Albuquerque in the mid-1600s."

and Francisco Fernández de la Cueva, 8th Duke of Alburquerque says,

"The villa of Alburquerque (note the difference in spelling from the name of the current city) was founded February 7, 1660 in New Mexico under his direction. He granted land to more than 100 Spanish families there."

The city's website says,

"Although there was no formal villa in the area, by the 1650s several dozen Spanish estancias (farms), were scattered throughout the valley. Among them was the home of Francisco de Trujillo and his wife, dona Luisa, located on the east bank of the Rio Grande amid a large stand of cottonwoods, near present-day Old Town. The property, which came to be known as El Bosque de doña Luisa (the Grove of doña Luisa), was chosen by New Mexico's governor in 1706 to be the site of the Villa de Alburquerque.
...
On 23 April 1706 Francisco Cuervo y Valdés, who replaced Governor Vargas in 1704, wrote to the king of Spain and to the viceroy of New Spain he had founded a new villa in New Mexico. Cuervo y Valdés named the community after the viceroy, Fernandez de la Cueva, Duque de Alburquerque. The governor, in his letter wrote:
I certify to his majesty: That I have founded a villa on the banks and in the valley of the River of the North in a place of good fields, waters, pastures, and timber, distant from this villa of Santa Fe about twenty-two leagues,... naming it the Villa of Alburquerque... "

What — if anything — happened in 1660? —wwoods 21:21, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Pop culture purge

I have removed the vast majority of the popular cultural references, as they are simply trivial or disambiguating references. They do not belong here, or anywhere else. --Eyrian 18:12, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

You are violating the wikipedia style manual page on avoiding trivia sections. It clearly states "do not simply remove these sections" and advises reaching consensus through the talk page as to what should and should not be included, etc.

I am going to replace the majority of what was in the list, in more "selectively-populated list[s] with a narrow theme" as per the style guide. If you have further objections to this, please let us discuss it here rather than unilaterally removing it because it does not fit what you personally think belongs here. Mathlaura 19:40, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

This isn't trivia, they're trivial popular cultural lists. Those are dealt with elsewhere. Listing things that just mention the place is silly. Things need to have demonstrable importance to the subject in question. --Eyrian 20:15, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Despite having written some of the material that was deleted, I agree with Eyrian for the most part. Virtually all of the material is too random, too trivial, or better put elsewhere. It would be worthwhile for someone to go through the list and see if anything deserves incorporation into the article, but I doubt that anything does.
That said, I agree with Mathlaura that it's a good idea to bring up major edits like this on the talk page, or at least provide a less terse explanation of the edit when it is done. For example, Eyrian's distinction between "trivia" and a "trivial popular cultural list" is not immediately clear---where is this dealt with? (Besides Eyrian's essay, that is, which is well-written and worth reading, but not an official guideline.) -- Spireguy 21:29, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
What is and is not of "demonstrable importance to the subject in question" is rather subjective. "Silly" is fully subjective. And I too would like a clarification on the distinction you are drawing between "trivia" and "trivial pop culture references" and a reference on what you mean by them being "dealt with elsewhere", as it's not something I have seen. I personally disagree with much of what is written in your article on the topic (though I appreciate the effort that went into it) and don't think that it is a natural corrolary of any official style guidelines or wikipedia policies that I have seen.
I've been too busy today to finish making the more narrowly-themed lists to replace the more random trivia list. I will try to do that at some point in the near future. Then perhaps we can reach consensus on a spot in between Eyrian's anti-trivia/pop-culture lists preference and my opposite thoughts on what is and is not of importance to the subject in question. Mathlaura 22:56, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
It may be worthwile to write a short section to cover the city as a filming location. Notable residents should have a section. But as for the rest, such as the name of the city appearing in a song that isn't about the city, those are not informative. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 23:06, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Balloon festival

Some kind of citation is needed to back up the claim that this is "the most photographed event in the world." Mplsbf 22:19, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Arts & Culture

This section is pretty weird. There are several other theatre projects going on around town besides tricklock, as well as interesting venues such as the outpost, the q-staff theatre, the Kimo(I know this is mentioned above but it should also be mentioned here)the vortex theatre and theatre company, the Launchpad, the el-ray, sunshine... There are slam poetry groups, a ballet company, chamber music groups, oh and has anyone ever heard of mariachis? Hector Pimentel? Also, there is a sentence that seems to be weirdly hanging out there after the paragraph about popejoy.--N88819 (talk) 06:29, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

please provide sources for population figures

Please provide sources when you give population figures, and remember to use only US Census numbers (see WP:USCITY). There has been a rash of unsourced "2008" population figures in various New Mexico articles (including this one), but the US Census Population Estimate Program only goes up to 2006 at present. These "2008" figures are of unknown origin and seem inflated. Thanks. --Uncia (talk) 20:55, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

The most recent purveyor of 2008 data, ABQ505, has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet of PoliticianTexas. --Uncia (talk) 13:02, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

While we're on the topic, I have a few questions regarding some future estimates in the "New Millennium" section. The article states that Albuquerque is "projected to reach 661,000 by 2010" and that the metropolitan area is "projected to reach 993,211 by 2010" both of which are not cited nor are they consistent with current growth rates for the Albuquerque area. It seems like the figures are more hopeful than factual. Unless they can be cited, I feel they should be deleted.--Mustang1966 (talk) 18:06, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Agree, the guidelines at WP:USCITY#Demographics say not to provide population estimates past the present. --Uncia (talk) 18:41, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

The table of the decennial censuses in Demographics was all wrong (and was not sourced), so I replaced it with correct data and gave sources. --Uncia (talk) 04:02, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Deleting table of top 10 fastest growing cities

I'm deleting the table, under Decades of growth, of the top 10 fastest growing US cities, because (1) the table is not relevant to Albuquerque; (2) the table is copied from CNN Money, which is probably WP:COPYVIO. --Uncia (talk) 02:04, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Controversy over city nicknames

There's been some controversy over the correct nickname(s) of Albuquerque in the infobox, so I've marked all the candidates as "citation needed". The Template:Infobox settlement guidelines describe the nickname field as "well-known nickname(s)". "Duke City" is well known although surprisingly hard to document; I did not find anything I would call a reliable source that said in so many words that it is a nickname for Albuquerque. The other candidates (Q-City, Burque, The 505) are more obscure and I was not able to find anything other than blogs that used those. I think they may not be "well-known" and so should be deleted. Thanks to anyone who can provide reliable sources in this matter. --Uncia (talk) 13:18, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Definitely removed. We've been over this a few times - all cities have "slang" terms; these are different than nicknames. Any city can be referred to by its area code. Almost every city has slang terms (Detroit = D-town, etc). These should ALL be removed, as we have in the past. Tan ǀ 39 15:36, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Remove all. I don't think nicknames are really encyclopedic, and there is the difficulty of getting reliable sources for them. --Uncia (talk) 15:50, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Tanthalas39 removed all nicknames, and I added a comment in the nickname field "do not use - see talk page". --Uncia (talk) 12:58, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

  • Add it Back- Albuquerque has been known as the "Duke City" all over the country, its been that way since i was a kid, i added the referance source and it was removed again. Now i could understand if "Burque" was there becuase that ghetto slang dont belong there!75.91.172.83 (talk) 00:31, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
All right, I'm going to try my best to remain open-minded here and assume good faith, despite the demanding attitude of this user and his "Duke City! Woooo!" edits. In his favor, he does list a source - which is not the best one, an FAQ of a site who's purpose is a little confusing - at its domain level, it seems to be a site about physics and optics or something. Anyway, other cities do have nicknames - see New York City. What do you think, Uncia? Tan ǀ 39 00:36, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm not opposed to stating that Duke City is a nickname for Albuquerque, since this is well known. I do think we need to draw the line and not admit more obscure nicknames, which is what started this discussion.
The source proposed by 75.91.172.83 (talk), namely Frequently Asked Questions About Albuquerque, seems to have accurate information but it's not a great source: The web site belongs to Sandia National Laboratories but the page is part of a package promoting a 2005 conference there (the top page is 16th Intl. Conference on Electronic Properties of Two-Dimensional Systems), so it's just some helpful hints and trivia for visitors and should not be considered WP:RS on city nicknames.
I also think we've spent more time on this issue that it deserves. My reading of WP:VERIFY is that sources are only required for information that is likely to be challenged or is being challenged, and "Duke City" is not likely to be challenged. Since 75.91.172.83 (talk) is passionate on the subject of Duke City, and the information really is true although maybe not verifiable, should we let him/her go ahead? I say Yes, but I think we need to head off the addition of the other, less believeable nicknames. Maybe this discussion is enough? Can we reach a consensus that "Duke City" is the one and only nickname of Albuquerque, and state the nickname without a source? I would vote for that. --Uncia (talk) 01:18, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Sources are required for all information on Wikipedia. What you are referring to above is that in-line citations - "footnotes" - are typically only required for material likely to be challenged, etc. Obviously, this strict interpretation of WP:V is not always followed, but a good foundation of common sense is usually enough to give credit to the content. I think you've inadvertently stumbled on the correct answer, however - let's put "Duke City" up as a nickname, but with a "citation needed" tag. Then we, the IP, or someone will perhaps find a reliable source for this nickname. Tan ǀ 39 02:36, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
I concur. --Uncia (talk) 03:04, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Uncia, I put in this nickname as discussed, and also removed the two uncited mottos. Do you have an opinion on that? Tan ǀ 39 15:55, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

(undent) Thanks for all your help in resolving this issue. I concur with deleting the mottos. I believe Albuquerque does not have a motto (although it has some advertising slogans). There's no motto on the city seal, see City Seal. Unlike a nickname, a motto needs to have some kind of official status, so we can reasonably require documentation for any proposed mottos—it's not enough for the motto to be "well known". --Uncia (talk) 16:15, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Found what I assume will be a solid reference - Albuquerque.com. Down in the "Albuquerque News" section, it refers to itself as the Duke City. Actually, site is a .com and probably not a "reliable" source, but I think it's better than we had before - lemme know what you think. Tan ǀ 39 16:32, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
That's a pretty good source, and at least appears to be current and probably often-visited (unlike the Sandia source we had for a 3-years-ago conference). What I would really like is a quote from a historian who says "Albuquerque is known as Duke City after the Duke of Alburquerque" but I haven't found anything yet. --Uncia (talk) 17:19, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Albuuqerque was often called the City of Illumination turing the tricentenial, but of course it probably wont be put back up since this is the only wiki city page i have seen where you need sources haha.

We need someone to upload a city seal for this page,.. Option 1: [1] Option 2: [2] Option 3: [3] Brandynman (talk) 16:47, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

All statements in Wikipedia are supposed to be based on reliable sources, see WP:RS. Statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged are required to give citations for the information, see WP:VERIFY. Often articles do not live up to these standards, but it's a good goal, and if a statement is challenged and no source can be found then the statement may be deleted.
The source you proposed for the nickname "City of Illumination", namely Lights top Crest for Tricentennial, seems to say that this was a slogan for the Tricentennial celebration rather than a nickname. Do you have other sources that say that "City of Illumination" is widely used today?
Regarding uploading the seal, Wikipedia is a do-it-yourself system, so if you want something uploaded you can do it yourself, see Help:Images and other uploaded files. Note that city seals are usually copyrighted by the city and cannot be used without permission, so they usually cannot be on Wikipedia. --Uncia (talk) 19:24, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Brandynman, proponent of the nickname "City of Illumination", is a sock puppet of PoliticianTexas and has been blocked indefinitely. Just something to think about when new nicknames come in. --Uncia (talk) 17:41, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

I was just asking to see if anyone wanted to upload it, anyways i know i have been on wikipedia for over 3 years.., i work for the city of albuquerque..you dont have to get permission for the seal. Brandynman (talk) 21:09, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

We would need an official written statement of release for its use on Wikipedia - your say-so on this talk page is far from adequate. If you can hook that up, however, it might work. Tan ǀ 39 21:11, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

I just want to discuss about few links that I want to add to this page and think that they can be helpful. Please let me know your thoughts. I really donot want to be aggressive and insert it and get it removed by somebody.Rather I would like to discuss and insert them so that they are added as enhancements to the page. Here are the links:-

www.unm.edu/

albuquerque-nm-living.com

www.virtualalbuquerque.com/

Please let know your thoughts. Thanks--PhoneBookHistorianGeek (talk) 22:07, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll let others give their opinion about the first link, but the second and third absolutely qualify as spam. No thanks! Dori (Talk • Contribs) 01:57, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Regarding the first link, the Wikipedia article University of New Mexico is already referenced in the article, so there's no need for an external link. --Uncia (talk) 02:45, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Skyline photo

I was wondering, instead of using File:Downtown albuquerque NM USA.jpg in the city infobox, can we please use File:ABQ.jpg? It shows the entire skyline, it's low-res, but extremely beautiful at the same time. And the current one only shows the Albuquerque Plaza building, making Albuquerque look a lot smaller than it really is. I live in Albuquerque and I would love to see my city as a whole, not just two buildings, and Image:ABQ.jpg does that task.

OK with me. The photo you prefer is better because it is brighter and is a more representative view of the city. (Remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four tildes.) --Uncia (talk) 21:59, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I think it's an improvement. Did you take the photo? Tan ǀ 39 22:13, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Actually, I'm worried about the licensing. User:Martinez07, who uploaded the photo in March 2008, has been indef blocked as a sock of banned user PoliticianTexas, who socked above. I can't speculate if this IP is the same user - but we should double-check the licensing/permission. Tan ǀ 39 22:16, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Sorry guys. I was the one that requested we switched the photo. I was using a school computer, and forgot to sign... And no, I did not take the picture. A Smashed Pumpkin (talk) 19:58, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
I think Wikipedia does not have permission to use this new image, and I have listed it for possible deletion. --Uncia (talk) 14:57, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Does that mean it's going to be removed from the List of tallest buildings in Albuquerque as well? 76.113.43.129 (talk) 15:25, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Yes, if an image is deleted from Wikipedia it is deleted everywhere in Wikipedia. This image has not been deleted yet, but it will be unless someone gives a convincing reason why Wikipedia has the right to use it. --Uncia (talk) 16:01, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

(undent) The proposed image, ABQ.jpg, has been deleted. Contrary to what Martinez07 said, it does not belong to the City of Albuquerque. It is a stock image from Marble Street Studio in Albuquerque. --Uncia (talk) 20:51, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

References requested for Cityscape section

I've added a Template:refimprove tag to the Cityscape section. The information here is probably reliable but it is unsourced. There are several instance of what may be dated statements, such as that some area is developing rapidly. There are some statements that may be not be NPOV, such as advantages and disadvantages of development strategies. Thanks to anyone who can help strengthen this section. --Uncia (talk) 13:40, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

ABQ history

Sections of the history portion of this article are currently filled with bogus information about Moorish and Roman settlement of Albuquerque. I'm not a registered user or a skilled Wikipedia editor, so I'm not going to mess with it. Just thought I'd point it out. (Comment made by 192.154.63.2 (talk · contribs) on 18 September 2008)

I'm not entirely sure it's bogus - it's just that it's about Alburquerque, not Albuquerque. May I suggest that we move this content to the Alburquerque article? PerryPlanet (talk) 21:16, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Stabilizing the infobox image

Background: The Albuquerque image (image_skyline) in the settlement infobox at the top of the page has been replaced about a dozen times over the past few months. The current (stable) image is Image:Abqdowntown.jpg. Some recent samples of replacement are here, here, here, and here. The replacement image lasts a few days or in some cases a few hours before being discovered to be a copyright violation and deleted, and the original image put back in. The new images were inserted by a succession of editors who appear to be sock puppets of PoliticianTexas (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log). This is also the same suspected sock puppet who kept changing the nickname in the infobox. A history of his suspected image activities is here.

Remedy: I propose to the community that we not change the image without discussion here and consensus. This has worked (fairly) well to stabilize the nickname. I'm not opposed to changing the image, but due to the difficulties listed above I think we need to be more formal, and perhaps put some additional pressure on the suspected sock puppet to go away. I have marked the image with a comment "Note: Please do not change image without discussing on talk page first". Thoughts? Thank you. --Uncia (talk) 12:07, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

    • Revert! I think we should revert back to image:AlbuquerqueView.jpg because, the image image:abqdowntown.jpg doesnt show the full skyline or the cityscape, unlike the AlbuquerqueView picture it shows the skyline, mountains and houses.. more detail to albuquerque.. i dont really think a discussion about this is really needed at all? other cities dont have discussions, some users from out of albuquerque areas have really made it harder for local users despite were trying to make it better and nothing is really getting far, everyone is worried about "sockpuppets".. honestly were here to make a difference and add material to the site, we dont get paid, its a volunteer site.. so everyone lets work together instead of talking about one another, anybody is able to post here, especially if were from here!! LamyQ (talk) 18:19, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
LamyQ, it's not so much that anyone has a problem with sockpuppets, it's that Wikipedia has a problem with copyrighted images being uploaded. If you didn't add images that belong to other people, then no one would have an issue with the infobox image. If you (1) upload non-free images, (2) get blocked, (3) create a new account, and then start over again at (1), well, then there's a problem. As has been suggested elsewhere, you should go read and understand Copyrights, Copyright tags, Non-free content, Image description page, Public domain, Images for deletion, Possibly unfree images, Copyright problems, and Uploading images—and after that, make useful contributions here. Right now, all you're doing is making a lot of work for other people. Dori (Talk • Contribs) 21:21, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Dori is correct. The sock puppet bit is only important to explain why the abuses have continued for so long, and why they are likely to continue. The important thing is that there has a been a stream of copyrighted images being added to this page, and I (for one) want to stop it.
So far, only the combatants in this matter have weighed in. Does anyone else have an opinion? --Uncia (talk) 02:01, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Update: The image File:AlbuquerqueView.jpg (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) proposed above has been discovered to be a copyright violation and has been deleted. Its proponent, LamyQ (talk · contribs), has been discovered to be a sock puppet or meat puppet of PoliticianTexas and has been blocked indefinitely. --Uncia (talk) 20:51, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

As far as I am concerned, I will revert any changes to the infobox and/or article photographs unless it is patently obvious that the new images are kosher. This shouldn't be too much of an issue as long as we are all on board with it. All proposed image changes must be discussed on the talk page first. Tan | 39 21:01, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

PoliticianTexas is banned

PoliticianTexas and by extension his sock puppets and meat puppets have been banned indefinitely from editing Wikipedia. He is the puppetmaster behind LamyQ, Martinez07, and many other sock puppets who have troubled the northern New Mexico articles, especially this one and several related to Española. He specializes in uploading copyright-violating images and scattering them around these pages. He also has a strong interest in local politics and in high school sports.

Whether this ban will have any deterrent effect is uncertain, but it does allow faster and more thorough action when he shows up again. See WP:BAN, especially WP:BAN#Community ban, WP:BAN#Site_bans and WP:BAN#Enforcement_by_reverting_edits. --Uncia (talk) 14:25, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Adding new image of skyline

I would like to change the image of Albuquerque. It shows various pictures of how Albuquerque has, such a statue in the University of New Mexico, an aerial view of the city. I would be greatful to change the image. KingScreamer (talk) 19:54, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

The proposed image, commons:Image:Albuquerque, NM.JPG, is a montage of several images and it is not clear that it is licensed properly. We've had a lot of trouble with copyrighted images being placed on this page, and it's not clear from the image description page that this image is copyright-free. Please provide the sources of the different images on the image page so that we can verify it is usable on Wikipedia. I have removed the image from this article for now, but you can put it back after you've provided the sources and licensing of the components on the image page. Thanks. --Uncia (talk) 23:50, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
The proposed image has been delete due to missing license information. --Uncia (talk) 22:42, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Move rejected.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 05:57, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Albuquerque, New Mexico → Albuquerque — The "Albuquerque" article is currently a redirect to Albuquerque, New Mexico. I personally think the article should be moved to Albuquerque, as it is the most well known use of the name. The city in Spain is spelled "Alburquerque". — ANDROS1337 21:01, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Survey

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.
  • I wasn't going to participate, but since you have I will too to balance the scales. To answer your question: this will go on as long as article titles remain unnecessarily disambiguated, a practice which is contrary to Wikipedia naming policies, guidelines and conventions. I predict that a move will be proposed for every article that is unnecessarily disambiguated, sooner or later, and periodically, as long as that article remains unnecessarily disambiguated. --Born2cycle (talk) 02:48, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Restructured article per WP:USCITY

I've restructured the article per the guidelines at WP:USCITY. I did not add or remove any content, except for changing and adding some headings. Three recommended sections don't have any content, so I've put in placeholders for those: Parks and Recreation, Utilities, and Healthcare. Two sections are (and already were) extremely long and should have portions split off into separate articles: History and Geography. --Uncia (talk) 04:17, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Great job, Uncia. Looks good! One question - should we really have those three "placeholder" sections? Is that standard to do that? Tan | 39 04:20, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
Placeholders are not standard, in fact I may have invented them on the spot. I would not be upset if somebody deleted them, but on the other hand I'm sure Albuquerque has lots of parks, utilities, and healthcare, and the placeholders may prompt somebody to describe these. --Uncia (talk) 04:40, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
Archive 1Archive 2

Organization

I'm re-arranging the order of some sections for a more logical presentation. The geography section now flows from the physical features to the layout of the city; the architecture section was moved to the Arts & Culture section; etc. Also spreads some images and tables to break up some cluttered areas. More content needed in many sections, of course. Laszlo Panaflex (talk) 00:30, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

City Councilors

I see that the mayor is mentioned but the 9 city councilors are not. Is that information that should be included? http://www.cabq.gov/council — Preceding unsigned comment added by MartianColony (talk • contribs) 03:41, 25 April 2015‎

That seems unnecessary. It would be a good addition to Government of Albuquerque, New Mexico, though. Grayfell (talk) 03:58, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Police Shootings

Do you think we should add a section regarding the recent issues regarding the police, particularly the shooting of James Boyd? It made international headlines and sparked protests throughout the city. As a resident of ABQ I can tell you that people are still very much talking about it and the wounds have not healed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MartianColony (talk • contribs) 03:41, 25 April 2015‎

The article link is James Boyd shooting. Adding a very brief mention seems like a good idea. The incident doesn't define the city, but it's a notable incident in its history. Grayfell (talk) 04:06, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Timeline of Albuquerque, New Mexico

What is missing from the recently created city timeline article? Please add relevant content. Contributions welcome. Thank you. -- M2545 (talk) 08:22, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

"Albaricoque" explanation

The current article includes this curious tidbit:

Western folklore offers a different explanation, tracing the name Albuquerque to the Galician word albaricoque, meaning "apricot". The apricot was brought to New Mexico by Spanish settlers, possibly as early as 1743. As the story goes, the settlement was established near an apricot tree, and became known as La Ciudad de Albaricoque. As frontiersmen were unable to correctly pronounce the Galician word, it became corrupted to "Albuquerque".

Actually, Western folklore does not offer this explanation, a writer named LB Mitchell offers this explanation in a 1949 issue of a journal entitled Western Folklore (per the footnote). Other curiosities include the fact that albaricoque also means apricot in Spanish, not just Galician. Finally, it seems farfetched to believe that Albuquerque is a corruption of albaricoque when the city had a governor whose name was Albuquerque, obviously a much more plausible explanation. This whole section should just be erased in my opinion. Valkotukka (talk) 22:30, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Mitchell attributes this explanation to "folk etymology" and points out difficulties with the "albus quercus" derivation. The passage could certainly be improved, but it is properly sourced. At any rate, an editor disagreeing with the conclusion of a RS is not grounds for removal. Laszlo Panaflex (talk) 23:18, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Even if the name Albuquerque is not derived from "albus quercus," the name of the town is presumably derived from the Portuguese guy who already had that name. But hey, it's properly sourced, there is no limit to space on the internet, so why not make the article as long as possible... (this is basically a structural problem of Wikipedia). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.99.17.181 (talk) 14:59, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
The "albus quercus" explanation was put forth by a member of the Alburquerque family as the derivation of their name. Mitchell disputes that derivation and argues that the albaricoque origin is more likely. And Wikipedia articles include "all majority and significant minority views" published in reliable sources. What you term a structural problem is seen by others as scholarly rigor. Laszlo Panaflex (talk) 15:35, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Ethnicities section in infobox does not add up to 100%?

69.7% + 4.6% + 4.6% + 3.3% + 2.6% + 15.1% + 46.7% = 1.46600 (146%) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.10.142.166 (talk) 03:51, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Look at the source: "Hispanics may be of any race, so also are included in applicable race categories." Laszlo Panaflex (talk) 03:59, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Media >> Film

What's with the paragraph that starts with: "Albuquerque has had several movies and shows filmed in the city..." ?

It's incoherent. Treat Whambin (talk) 06:28, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Statistical areas

The intro refers to both a "Metropolitan Statistical Area" and a "combined statistical area." They should have consistent casing, either both uppercase or both lowercase. Anyone have a preference? Maurreen (talk) 03:21, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Government docs frequently treat these as generic (lowercase) in text, even though tables and listings often use caps. Per MOS:CAPS, that suggests we should use lowercase generally. Dicklyon (talk) 05:39, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. Will do. Maurreen (talk) 03:00, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Albuquerques Culture and Festivities

CULTURE Albuquerque's culture is very interesting considering the location of the city. Albuquerque is very rich with native American culture as well as Mexican culture because of its location. Considering that the city is surrounded by reservations Albuquerque has strong native American roots. Albuquerque also has many people with Hispanic or Mexican roots living here because of the past of the land Albuquerque was built on. All the people, past, and geography of Albuquerque is what make the cities culture.

BALLOON FIESTA The Balloon Fiesta is located in Albuquerque, New Mexico and is the biggest gathering of hot air Balloons in the world. People from all over the world will come to take part in these events that happen in this week long fiesta. Albuquerque is the best location of this because we are geographically set up for a successful ballooning event. The mountains and the valley form this thing called the "box" which makes the balloons the best to fly here. It also block certain theater patterns that are bad for balloons. Albuqeuerque Interantional Balloon Fiesta, Quest Info, Plopezz15 (talk) 04:50, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Not done - unreferenced. John from Idegon (talk) 06:06, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
These are notable aspects -- that are covered on the page -- but the additions made in recent days have been copied and pasted text from web sites promoting such events. These are copyright violations that must be removed from Wikipedia immediately. The sources used are also inappropriate as promotional materials. Please review policies on reliable sources and copyright. Laszlo Panaflex (talk) 13:10, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Albuquerque, New Mexico. 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}}).

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) 20:56, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 17 external links on Albuquerque, New Mexico. 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) 17:00, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Albuquerque, New Mexico. 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) 06:18, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Albuquerque, New Mexico. 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) 01:22, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Albuquerque Rapid Transit (ART) Discussion

I think we need to look into the possibility of the city's "Albuquerque Rapid Transit" project having some mention in the "Urban Issues" section of the article. The ART project has proven controversial and has been covered extensively in local media in the area. It was a hot button issue in the most recent mayoral election in 2017. Regards. EnglishEfternamn*t/c* 22:34, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Mistake

There's a mistake with the ethnicities percentages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 181.28.34.212 (talk • contribs)

See Talk:Albuquerque,_New_Mexico/Archive_2#Demography. Laszlo Panaflex (talk) 16:03, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Chihuahuan Desert?

John from Idegon (talk · contribs) wrote "If you disagree with sourced content, you need to provide reliable secondary sources in a discussion on the article talk page and attempt to gain consensus" but most of the uses of Chihuahuan Desert that that IP removed where not sourced. The sourcing for Alburquerque being part of the Chihuahan Desert region is pretty flimsy. The "60 Hikes" book says "This hike skirts a bosque riparian forest within a finger of Chihuahuan desert that extends north to Albuquerque", which suggests that a small sliver of the area by the Rio Grande south of town might be considered Chihuahuan, but not much more. Other sources suggest the northern end of the Chihuahuan is the Socorro area (downriver a bit). So I have to agree with the IP's edits, generally; Albuquerque is central, not southern NM and is mostly outside the northern extent of the Chihuahuan. Some subtle refinement may be in order. Dicklyon (talk) 03:26, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Reviewing the edits, I decided to revert to the IP's version for now. More precise updates are welcome, but the extra half-dozen mentions of Chihuahuan Desert do not seem warranted. Dicklyon (talk) 03:30, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Albuquerque,_New_Mexico/Archive_1&oldid=1206554803"