Talk:Detroit bankruptcy/Archive 1

Archive 1

move

I have moved the article to the simpler Detroit bankruptcy given there are not multiple bankruptcies. I have also created the redirect Bankruptcy of Detroit

Good idea. Consesus achieved. Geraldshields11 (talk) 12:23, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

lead

Two issues; the comments on other bankruptcies are nowhere referenced in the article (I will look for some) and the "unlit streets" comment reads like an essay--a quote from a notable source might be better. μηδείς (talk) 02:39, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi μηδείς, the article developed quickly with several contributors. It initially started with a reference to the nyt article –everything in it was based on it. When other information surfaced the reference to the nyt article was seperated from the text in the lead. I hope this clears this up a bit? XOttawahitech (talk) 16:14, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. μηδείς (talk) 16:44, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Creditors

Who are the creditors? Abductive (reasoning) 04:06, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

List of Top 20 unsecured creditors is at [1]. 88.148.249.186 (talk) 08:48, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks - great source. Just wondering if it considered primary at Wikipedia, and if so is it "reliable"? XOttawahitech (talk) 16:02, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Unverifiable citation

We have an unverifiable citation titled "In Despair, Detroit Files for Bankruptcy" added by User:Geraldshields11. Did this come from a hard copy of a newspaper? If so, please provide name of the newspaper, section number, and page number. Alternatively, if the material came from online, we need the url. Thanks -- Diannaa (talk) 15:48, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Dear Diannaa: Yes, it is a hard copy of Express (newspaper) in Washington, DC. AP might have an online link. Geraldshields11 (talk) 16:10, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I was unable to find a copy of the article online. Could you please add section and page numbers to the citation? Thanks. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:53, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I will. Geraldshields11 (talk) 00:51, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Here is a PDF[2] of the entire issuse and the article is on page 3 as mentioned on the cover page. Geraldshields11 (talk) 00:59, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Interesing discussion at ITN

For those who have not seen it: Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates#.5BPosted.5D_Detroit_Bankruptcy. Some ideas on what else should be includedin this article? XOttawahitech (talk) 15:52, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

"It is the largest municipal bankruptcy filing by debt..." where?

In the world or in the United States? — Kpalion^(talk) 20:32, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Chapter 9 bankruptcies apply only to the US. μηδείς (talk) 22:21, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Image size

The photo of Belle Isle should not be reduced to 175 px in size. Per WP:IMGSIZE, "In general, do not define the size of an image unless there is a good reason to do so: some users have small screens or need to configure their systems to display large text." The reverse is also true; setting it at 175 px is much smaller than the default of 220 px, and forces images to appear much smaller than my chosen size of 300 px. I can't see any good reason to reduce the size below the default, but my attempts to use the default have been reverted. Imzadi 1979 → 05:08, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

I reverted it because larger images lead to a large empty space at the bottom of the section, and the clear template has also been removed. I have no problem per se with it bing bigger, but I don't know how to do that without creating a blank space issue for laptop formats. μηδείς (talk) 21:31, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Citation suggestions

Going forward, I'm going to strongly suggest to interested editors that they should keep on top of the citations in this article. Some tips:

• Keep completing the footnotes so they all have author, title, publication, dates, etc. If a link goes dead or changes later, it's so much easier to resurrect the citation if the full information is added now.
  • If an article comes from the Associated Press, or another newswire agency, note it. If access to the article is lost at some point, it may be possible to recover it by finding another paper that ran the wire story.
• At least as long as it is an option, I'd suggest pre-emptively archiving source articles using http://www.webcitation.org/ . That way If a link goes dead, it's still accessible.
• Where possible, determine if the online versions of articles are appearing in print, and then add the page number and date of print publication. This is a second backup, directing readers to the print editions. In line with this, add the ISSN or OCLC numbers that correspond to the print edition of a newspaper so that readers can find libraries hosting the print edition of the newspaper.

The goal is that all sources can be verified in the future, none will need to be removed if links go dead, and readers will be presented with a somewhat polished article. Imzadi 1979 → 14:35, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

How many chapter 9 have been filed in the US?

The article says this:

• "municipal bankruptcies since the Great Depression are rare (about 60 since 1950), "

and

• "Since 1937, there have been over 600 other Chapter 9 bankruptcies in the United States of cities, towns, villages and counties"

XOttawahitech (talk) 19:41, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

• I was confused as well at first. The times reference is for the 1950 number. But there were a lot of bankruptcies right after the first law was passed in 1937. Both figures are correct. μηδείς (talk) 20:08, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Are you saying that between 1937 and 1950 there were about 580 Chapter 9s in the US? XOttawahitech (talk) 20:45, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
    • That would be the math. I have no personal knowledge. There probably is a better source, somewhere that gives both in one breath, a chart maybe. Be it seems not at all unlikely since it was the desperate straits of many municipalities in the depression that forced the first passage of such a bill in 1934 and repassage in 1937 when the first was found problematic. μηδείς (talk) 21:27, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
      • Something to keep in mind, on the technical terminology: There was no Chapter 9 -- in 1934, 1937, or 1950. Chapter 9, along with Chapter 7, Chapter 11, and Chapter 13, became the terminology with the adoption of the current Bankruptcy Code of 1978. ("Chapter 9 and its predecessors" -- of which the 1934 act was the first -- would be more accurate. --Pechmerle (talk) 21:26, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
        • Thanks, Pechmerle, I did not know that the "chapter" terminology only came in 1978. What is the significance of the dates you mention? By the way for those interested, there is a bit more info about number of municipal bankruptcies at: List_of_Chapter_9_bankruptcies_of_the_United_States#History. XOttawahitech (talk) 13:04, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
        • The dates are mentioned because up above there is a comment that there were a lot of Chapter 9 (type) bankruptcies between 1937 and 1950, and relatively few between 1950 and the present. 1934 is significant as the first act of Congress authorizing public-entity bankruptcy filings. That act was challenged by bond-holder groups as unconstitutional, on Tenth Amendment grounds (some sovereignty reserved to the states by the Constitution). That challenge was successful. However, the financial depression was continuing, and Congress returned with a new act in 1937. This was one involved an element of state authorization for Chapter 9 type filings (either on a blanket basis, some narrower but general criteria, or a case by case basis). The 1937 act was held constitutional. It was modernized in the Bankruptcy Code of 1978 as Chapter 9. It is true that the greatest number of Chapter 9 type bankruptcies occurred during the depression; they were mainly smaller entities such as rural irrigation districts. I'm not sure why someone here made the cut at 1950; probably merely because they'd seen figures for before and after that date. Since 1950 probably the largest number of cases have involved health care districts. Big dollar cases, like Orange County, Calif.; Jefferson County (Birmingham); Stockton, Calif., and now Detroit have been rare. --Pechmerle (talk) 23:50, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

The perceived discrepancy in the figures turns out to involve a divergent use of terminology. The NYT piece with the 60-since-1950's fact refers to cities, towns, villages, and counties. But the bankruptcy code defines "municipality" much more broadly than that, to include irrigation districts, health care & hospital districts, etc. Such special district Chapter 9 filings have been more numerous. When they are included, the number of Chapter 9's since about 1950 is more like 290, making the apparent disproportion between 1937 - 1950 and 1950 - present much less than was first shown. I've touched up the article a bit to make this clearer. The WP article on Chapter 9 bankruptcies has more detail. --Pechmerle (talk) 08:22, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

This story needs a picture that represents the broken down city

I found the comment in the reader comments:

This story needs a picture of a run down house that represents the broken down city?

I wonder how we go about getting such pictures (TV stations have lots of those). XOttawahitech (talk) 13:13, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Decline of Detroit has some already. DMacks (talk) 13:21, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Commons has an entire category: [3] Rmhermen (talk) 16:00, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Good find! I added it as a {{commons cat|Abandoned buildings in Detroit, Michigan}} to Decline of Detroit. DMacks (talk) 16:29, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

There is already a decline of Detroit article which would be the place. One single building wouldn't really illustrate anything. It is hard to picture decay on a city scale, or prove the picture is relevant to this article. μηδείς (talk) 04:20, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

How about replacing the "James Scott Fountain - Detroit skyline" with a more appropriate picture from the category suggested by RmhermenXOttawahitech (talk) 05:16, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Ottawahitech, the Belle Isle picture was more relevant to the section than the ruined Russell Industrial Complex that you have substituted, because Belle Isle is one of the Detroit assets that has been discussed for possible sale in the bankruptcy proceeding and that point is mentioned in the section. I think we should go back to the Belle Isle picture. --Pechmerle (talk) 00:57, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

• I have restored the picture of Belle Isle Park which is a city asset threatened with sale and mentioned in the section. I am not hugely opposed to a decay picture, but, again, one priate property doesn't exactly tell a full story. A fourth picture is not really problematic. μηδείς (talk) 01:45, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Photo of Kevyn Orr needed

Both in the run-up to the bankruptcy filing, and now in the case, emergency manager Kevyn Orr has far more power than Mayor Bing has been left with by the State's emergency manager legislation. There should be a photo of Orr in the article if there is one of Bing. --Pechmerle (talk) 00:03, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

There's no picture of him in his article, so it's unlikely we have one available. μηδείς (talk) 04:18, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

See also section

I removed a link about NYC getting a loan. Maybe include if Detroit gets bailed out, but still maybe. Not sure how much that adds. If you think it can be worked into the article, that would be another story. What do others think? Thank you. --Malerooster (talk) 03:58, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

• I believe the information regarding History of New York City in the 70's is very interesting to readers of this article. There seem to be many parallels. In the meantime while we "duke" it out here, I restored the link to the article. XOttawahitech (talk) 05:11, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

I am sorry you feel the need to duke out anything. This links to a section of another article? Again, if this could be worked into the article, that is the best way to improve this article, otherwise leave it out per MOS. --Malerooster (talk) 05:20, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

NYC's experience is relevant. The current Chapter 9 of the Bankruptcy Code was given its present form in important part as a response to the difficulties of dealing with NYC's enormous problems in the early 1970's. For example, current Chapter 9 has as its one of its indicators of eligibility for such a bankruptcy that a public entity has so many creditors that negotiating with them outside the formal framework of bankruptcy proceedings is a practical impossibility. That provision has in mind situations like NYC, and now Detroit, where there are thousands or even hundreds of thousands of creditors whose claims need to be dealt with. A cross-reference -- of some kind -- would be useful to the reader who wants to understand the dynamics of these huge insolvency matters. (I accept that Ottawahitech put "duke" in quotes because he wasn't intending to be combative about this.) --Pechmerle (talk) 20:06, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Again, all I am saying is that per MOS, the best thing is to try to work the see also material into the article if possible. If not, so be it. I will certainly not remove it again since a few others have chimmed in. Also, no big deal about "duking" it out. I just don't like cock fights, they never end well for anyone :) Cheers, --Malerooster (talk) 20:21, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Topical vs Chronological Presentation

I've shifted the discussion of legal developments in the case from a purely chronological narrative to the beginnings of a topical treatment. This becomes important for clarity now that we are beyond the initial phase of the case. There will be parallel developments going on with the appeal of eligibility, with the negotiations for a plan of adjustment, and with other topics such as whether the DIA's art collection can be sold to raise funds to pay creditors.

I also want to break out as a separate sub-topic the legal expenses being incurred in the case. Other topics deserving separate sub-topics are, for example, the city's effort to obtain court approval for $350 million in financing from Barclays for use during the bankruptcy case. That further organizational work on the article will have to await another evening's efforts.

I also did some editing to trim out a few lines about developments that have become minor now that the big issue of eligibility has received an initial ruling. Similarly, I fixed a few verb tenses where what were present events have slid into the past.

If others have thoughts on the best organization of this article, I'd be interested to hear them. My goal is to keep what can be a technical subject as clear as possible for typical readers. --Pechmerle (talk) 08:09, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Onl 58% of readers found what they were looking for

Check out View reader feedback at the top of the page. How can we improve? XOttawahitech (talk) 05:35, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

My guess is that readers didn't find what they were looking for because it hadn't happened yet. For example, they may have wanted to know whether the bankruptcy court can override Michigan's constitutional prohibition on impairment of vested pension benefits. Or they may have wanted to know if the city had been found eligible for Chapter 9 or not. These are things that are only starting to become more definite with today's ruling from Judge Rhodes. And these key issues are going up on appeal, with rulings on the appeals at least months away. Readers are going to come here and not get absolute answers to questions that they may have; that's just the nature of this particular beast. Eventually, we'll know how it all turned out. But until then --- --Pechmerle (talk) 08:17, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Law

Please see discussion: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Law#Detroit_bankruptcy XOttawahitech (talk) 00:28, 7 December 2013 (UTC)