Talk:Philadelphia/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Change to Notable Residents

I don't feel it is pertinent enough to Philadelphia to include actress Liza Weil from the Gilmore Girls? She doesn't have the fame and notoriety of the other cited entertainers from Philly. Moreover, she isn't actually from Philly- Landsdale is an immediate suburb. I would like to omit this section because I believe it trivializes the content of the page. Any thoughts on this? Please add to the discussion page.

Minor Etymology Change

I just wanted to post to explain why I am changing the article from reading "city of brotherly love" to "brotherly love". Philadelphia is from the Greek philos "love" + adelphos "brother", i.e. there is no 'city' part. This can be ratified at this Etymology Dictionary, which I have found to be a very reliable and accurate source. Best of luck on your WikiProject!

Merge with Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania???

I do not think that Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania should be merged into this article, because until all the townships and boroughs were finally brought into one entity, that is the City of Philadelphia, the County of Philadelphia has its own separate history, legally speaking. - CobaltBlueTony 18:42, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Totally agree, Considering that the two were separate government entities up until 1952 means their has been some semblance of history of the two subjects that is nor concurrent and could not easily be placed in the other article that would not confuse people who are looking for information of the subject. Also the bound ires of the two subjects in question were not as one until 1854 so what for almost 250 years their was a separate City and County of Philadelphia, and that the City of Philadelphia during that time, though the most important, was not even the largest part of of the county, some of the other boroughs and townships were by far larger. Also Philadelphia county has never been abolished nor has it merged with the city, something that would take an act of the state similar to the consolidation act of 1854 to abolish or merge the county with the city. Their is still a Philadelphia County, it just has no government structure, it in all of the technical sense disbanded it government and allowed the city to assume the services that it provided. And i am sorry but the argument that other city/county merged places, as in New York or Denver that don't have their corresponding county pages so why does Philadelphia have one, to me that just does not fly. --Boothy443 | comhrá 03:50, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

I disagree. Using New York's setup as an example, which I'm not sure why you're so against considering it works very well, Philadelphia County would redirect to Philadelphia, where it is already explained that the city and county are coterminous. The history section of the Philadelphia city article will need to be slightly reworked to include the additional information on the city's gradual expansion outward to the county lines, but that shouldn't prove a difficult task. I might even do it myself sometime when I'm less sleepy. In any case, this approach fills in holes in the city's article (why is there yet no mention of Philadelphia originally comprising what today is the Center City?), reduces redundancy, and ensures that every question the reader has about Philadelphia, being the area today known as Philadelphia, is answered in one place: here (and before some smart-ass mentions this: subpages don't count, silly rabbit). --Vladtheinhaler 01:40, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

The city and county are one and the same and share the same borders. There was almost no information under Philadelphia County. The fact that the city and county are one in the same should be reason enough to have county redirect to city. San Francisco, CA, Indianapolis, IN and Miami Dade, FL are other examples of this. evrik 14:33, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Currently, the county and city are coterminous. However, under Pennsylvania law, the county still has a separate jural existence, even though it has no existence outside the city. It is not unlike the unique status of the City and County of San Francisco. For example, similar to the case in San Francisco, the city court is the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, and there is still a Philadelphia County Sheriff. Nonetheless, for all intents and purposes, the county is the city. At some point soon I am going to be bold and merge the Philadelphia County page into the City of Philadelphia page. - Sensor 00:05, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Well it noice to see the if i jump off the bridge everone should mentailty rule here on wikipedia. I am not going to waste my try to explain any thing to a buch of one tracked minded mergers, other then i will dispute any attempt to merge the articles, and the any merging of the articles i will revert in my being bold as a part of that dispute. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 02:50, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

This is a pretty silly issue to have a revert war over, Boothy, don't you think? (Especially if 3RR ends up being violated over one link on this page.) Doesn't it seem we should be able to reach a consensus on this issue? - Sensor 22:58, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Consolidated city-county

Cities and counties, formerly separate entities, that have since merged and are now coextensive:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consolidated_city-county Philadelphia is listed there ... evrik 19:00, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Well the good thing about wikipedia is that one can correct mistakes. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 20:01, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Gotta keep fixing your errors. evrik 20:40, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

There does appear to be a subtle difference between "truly" consolidated city-county governments like the City and County of San Francisco and the City and County of Denver, and Philadelphia, in that the county appears to be maintained as a separate entity. Here's a test: has anyone ever heard of it being officially called the City and County of Philadelphia? Denvoran 20:53, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

As a former resident no i have never herd of the City and County of Philadelphia. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 21:06, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

I have not heard it called that either. In fact the only time I ever hear Phildelphia County mentioned is when the weather service makes an alert for the area. MechBrowman 21:17, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

I am a former Philadelphia resident as well. Please note from my comments above that I never said that it was called the City and County of Philadelphia, or anything like that. My point was that City and County governments have merged, being one and the same, and the borders of the city are coterminous with that of the county. That's exactly what happened in San Francisco. And unlike other large cities with have subsumbed their counties, Philadelphia County still maintains a separate legal existence, which mainly comes up in the area of the courts and judicial functions. I don't think this needs to be a contentious issue. - Sensor 22:06, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Regarding "that's exactly what happened in San Francisco"...I don't think that a "City of San Francisco" and a "County of San Francisco" ever existed apart from one another. Ditto for Denver. This is another reason why Philadelphia appears to be different - it became a merged city-county through an evolutionary process, while I believe SF and Denver existed as such ever since they were created. Denvoran 23:47, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Inconsistency

Look at this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_County

It refers righ to the city page. The same should hold true for Philadelphia. evrik 19:00, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Legal status of Philadelphia County

The following sections from Title 16 of the Unconsolidated Pennsylvania Statutes are instructive:

§ 201. Enumeration of counties.

The State shall be divided into the following sixty-seven named counties, as now established by law: Philadelphia, Bucks, Chester, Lancaster, York, Cumberland, Berks, Northampton, Bedford, Northumberland, Westmoreland, Washington, Fayette, Franklin, Montgomery, Dauphin, Luzerne, Huntingdon, Allegheny, Mifflin, Delaware, Lycoming, Somerset, Greene, Wayne, Adams, Centre, Beaver, Butler, Mercer, Crawford, Erie, Warren, Venango, Armstrong, Indiana, Jefferson, McKean, Clearfield, Potter, Tioga, Cambria, Bradford, Susquehanna, Schuylkill, Lehigh, Lebanon, Columbia, Union, Pike, Perry, Juniata, Monroe, Clarion, Clinton, Wyoming, Carbon, Elk, Blair, Sullivan, Forest, Lawrence, Fulton, Montour, Snyder, Cameron and Lackawanna.

(Emphasis supplied)

§ 210. Counties divided into nine classes.

For the purposes of legislation and the regulation of their affairs, counties of this Commonwealth, now in existence and those hereafter created, shall be divided into nine classes as follows:

(1) First Class Counties, those having a population of 1,500,000 inhabitants and over. * * *

See also Article IX, § 13 of the Pennsylvania Constitution:

Section 13. Abolition of County Offices in Philadelphia

(a) In Philadelphia all county offices are hereby abolished, and the city shall henceforth perform all functions of county government within its area through officers selected in such manner as may be provided by law.

(b) Local and special laws, regulating the affairs of the City of Philadelphia and creating offices or prescribing the powers and duties of officers of the City of Philadelphia, shall be valid notwithstanding the provisions of section thirty-two of Article III of this Constitution.

(c) All laws applicable to the County of Philadelphia shall apply to the City of Philadelphia.

(d) The City of Philadelphia shall have, assume and take over all powers, property, obligations and indebtedness of the County of Philadelphia.

(e) The provisions of section two of this article shall apply with full force and effect to the functions of the county government hereafter to be performed by the city government.

(f) Upon adoption of this amendment all county officers shall become officers of the City of Philadelphia, and until the General Assembly shall otherwise provide, shall continue to perform their duties and be elected, appointed, compensated and organized in such manner as may be provided by the provisions of this Constitution and the laws of the Commonwealth in effect at the time this amendment becomes effective, but such officers serving when this amendment becomes effective shall be permitted to complete their terms.

From the provisions cited above, the following should be clear:

1. Philadelphia County still has a cognizable legal status under Pennsylvania law.
2. Philadelphia County is the one and only First Class county in Pennsylvania, as it is the only county with a population in excess of 1.5 million.
3. The Pennsylvania Constitution abolished "all county offices" and provided that the City of Philadelphia would "perform all functions of county government", which includes the several various county offices required by Pennsylvania law, including the sheriff, prothonotary, district attorney, and the like.

This is what distinguishes Philadelphia County from some other large cities which have swallowed up their counties. The county still legally exists but yet has no legal functions whatsoever. It is not a consolidated city-county, because by the time the county offices were abolished, the city was the county, and the county was the city. This is in contradistinction to, say, the Unigov concept in Indianapolis, the Louisville-Jefferson County Metro Government or the "two-tier" system in Miami-Dade. - Sensor 22:55, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Just to follow up with what sensor said about the leagal status

The following section from Philadelphia Home Rule Charter - ARTICLE XI. Severability and Acts Superseded sepecifialy parts of the following sections:

Section 11-100 Severability.'

It is the intention of the electors of Philadelphia that if this charter cannot take effect in its entirety because of the judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction holding invalid any part or parts thereof, the remaining provisions of the charter shall be given full force and effect as completely as if the part or parts held invalid had not been included herein. It is the intention of the electors that if any court of competent jurisdiction shall hold invalid any provisions of this charter transferring to an office, department, board or commission the powers and duties heretofore exercised and performed by an officer, department, board or commission abolished by this charter, the provisions abolishing such office, department, board or commission shall thereby become inoperative, and that in such event, such office, department, board or commission shall not be abolished, but shall continue as prior to the adoption of this charter. The remaining provisions of this charter shall in any such case be given full force and effect.

ANNOTATION

• Sources: The Administrative Code of 1929, Act of April 9, 1929, P.L. 177, Section 2901.

• Purposes: If any provision of this Charter is declared to be invalid, the remainder of the Charter is to remain in complete effect. While a declaration of invalidity of a transfer of powers and duties may reestablish an abolished agency, a remedy is available by way of amendment of this Charter.

Section 11-103 Certain Provisions of Consolidation Act Still in Force.

This charter does not supersede, but takes effect subject to and in accord with, unless and until the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is amended, and any legislation required by such amendment is enacted to provide otherwise, the following provisions of the act entitled "A further supplement to an act, entitled 'An Act to incorporate the City of Philadelphia'", approved February 2, 1854, P.L. 21, commonly called the Consolidation Act, namely:

"Section 1. ... the corporate name of the mayor, alderman, and citizens of Philadelphia shall be changed to 'The City of Philadelphia, and the boundaries of the said city shall be extended so as to embrace the whole of the territory of the county of Philadelphia, and all the powers of the said corporation, as enlarged and modified by this act, shall be exercised, and have effect within the said county, and over the inhabitants thereof."

"Section 41. The county of Philadelphia shall continue to be one of the counties of this Commonwealth, and all county officers, not superseded by this act, shall continue in office, and continue to be elected ..as... now provided by law, and be denominated officers of the county of Philadelphia; and all courts shall continue therein to exercise the jurisdictions and powers now conferred upon them by the constitution and laws of this Commonwealth; and the councils of said city, and the officers thereof, shall exercise all the powers and authorities of the superseded county commissioners and county board, and commissioners of sinking fund, and of other officers not inconsistent with this act, in such way and manner as by this act is, or by the city councils may be established."

ANNOTATION

• Sources: See Acts cited in text of section.

• Purposes: See Annotation to Section 11-101. Sections of the Consolidation Act of 1854, as amended, are stated in substance or quoted to emphasize that they have not been superseded.

Note: Not i left out Section 10, 12, 13, 38, and 39 as these are concerned with eletion, debt, and tax issues and not the legal status of the city or county.

--Boothy443 | trácht ar 01:04, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

__ Note above "First Class Counties, those having a population of 1,500,000 inhabitants and over" . . . and Phila has been the only county to meet that definition. Until recently. In the 2000 census, the population was close to this threshhold and unofficial census counts in 2004 place the population at 1.47 million. My understanding is that First Class Counties have certain rights not available to inferior classes, although I have yet to find the reference. I wonder what that bodes for the city, er, county, er... whatever. NIKKO

Section 211 at http://members.aol.com/StatutesP3/16.Cp.1.02.html (the appropriate section of the state statutes, on the changes of class) states:

Whenever it shall appear by any such census that any county has attained a population entitling it to an advance in classification, or whenever it shall appear by the last two preceding censuses that a county has heretofore or hereafter decreased in population so as to recede in classification, as herein provided, it shall be the duty of the Governor, under the great seal of this Commonwealth, to certify that fact accordinly, to the board of county commissioners on or before the first day of October of the year succeeding that in which the census was taken or as soon thereafter as may be, which certificate shall be forwarded by the commissioners to the recorder of deeds and be recorded in his office.

It is the intent of this section that the classification of any county shall not be changed because its population has decreased at the time of one United States decennial census, because it is recognized that a change in the form of local government is attended by certain expense and hardship, and such change should not be occasioned by a temporary fluctuation in population, but rather only after it is demonstrated by two censuses that the population of a county has remained below the minimum gifure of its class for at least a decade.

The threshold for being a first class county is 1.5 million. Philadelphia County (City, whatever...) was above that threshold in 2000. It may be below it in 2010. But in order to lose this status, Philadelphia would have to have population below 1.5 million in both the 2010 and 2020 censuses,and further reading of the statute reveals that the change would take effect on January 1, 2022. So we don't need to worry about this right now. Izzycat 01:41, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Why a merge?

Why is there so much eagerness for a merge here? While nobody disputes that Philadelphia County and the city of Philadelphia are now coterminous, I don't see why that should be the end of it. We have separate articles about London and Greater London, for instance, in spite of the fact that the two are, so far as I am aware, considerably closer to being identical than Philadelphia County and City are. Basically, looking at the Philadelphia County article, it looks pretty useful at the moment. As others have noted, prior to 1952, the two had separate functions, and prior to 1854, the city did no encompass the whole county. The whole history of all this is gone into in some detail on the Phialdelphia County page, which is appropriate. It would be inappropriate to go into this level of detail on the Philadelphia, Pennsylvania page, which ought to focus on being an encylopedia article about a major American city. It seems obvious that the clear answer to this dilemma is to maintain a separate page on the county in order to deal with the complex issues of city and county relationship that there is no particular need to go into great detail on in the main article. john k 00:14, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

I am okay with having the County article exist. Boothy and I keep going back and forth about the category. I don't think the category should exist and that the category should be consolidated with the city.

evrik 15:31, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Truce ?

Let's bring in a third party or put this up to a vote. evrik 20:47, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

I am in favor of referring to a third party. What, precisely, should be the issue decided? - Sensor 23:06, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

My only issue is the 'categories.' I think that there should not be a county category and that the Philadelphia County category should point to the Philadelphia, PA category. I can't speak for anyone else.evrik 14:23, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

It does seem rather silly to have a category for a county which is, at present, identical to the city. john k 17:10, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

No i find it silly to mislead and misinform people that are not knowledgable on the subject, such as evrik, that the City of Philadelphia, which this article is about, is a county in the State Pennsylvania, which it is not, in a attempt to force a merge of two articles. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 20:18, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Yeah right Boothy, that's why you seem to be following me wherever I write about Philadelphia and revert my edits.evrik 20:22, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Stop this ridiculous revert war please! There should not be any county category at all here. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania is not a county it is a city. It does not belong in Pennsylvania Counties. Also there should not be a category for Philadelphia County because not enough articles could go in it. Just delete the Philadelphia County category and leave Phildelphia out of the Philadelphia Counties category. MechBrowman 20:40, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

There are no non-counties in Pennsylvania, or any other state in the US. County governments in which the borders of one entire municipal authority is contiguous with the county DO EXIST; they just don't do very much. According to the City Charter, the county still exists: Certain Provisions of Consolidation Act Still in Force. Section 41:

Section 41. The county of Philadelphia shall continue to be one of the counties of this Commonwealth, and all county officers, not superseded by this act, shall continue in office, and continue to be elected ... as ... now provided by law, and be denominated officers of the county of Philadelphia; and all courts shall continue therein to exercise the jurisdictions and powers now conferred upon them by the constitution and laws of this Commonwealth; and the councils of said city, and the officers thereof, shall exercise all the powers and authorities of the superseded county commissioners and county board, and commissioners of sinking fund, and of other officers not inconsistent with this act, in such way and manner as by this act is, or by the city councils may be established.”

Clearly, there is a Philadelphia County government, and it remains a legal entity at all levels of recognition. - CobaltBlueTony 20:53, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

The County Government barely exists. the city has subsumed most of the functions of the countyevrik 21:29, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Nonetheless, it does exist, and has separate historical and contemporary significance apart from the City government. I present further evidence in the form of website of the Philadelphia Sheriff, officially called the Sheriff of the City and County of Philadelphia. I am pursuing further contact with the sheriff's office in order to query as to their knowledge of the state of the County, as it were. - CobaltBlueTony 21:52, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Cleary it is, cleary basedon evrik edits and his comment on the medation, his is ultimate goal is to force a merger of the two articles. As such i will not participate in the medation that has been insgated by a user that i can only see as editing in bad faith. And as for a truse i propse that we keep the artile categotry and conetents regarding the city and county split to the version that it was prior to the editing by evrik and that eidts to the contairy by evrik or anyone else be considered misleading and misinformative vandalism, and be reverted on site. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 21:09, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Wait ... I asked for a truce ... and put this up for mediation, and you're calling me the vandal?evrik 21:29, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Request for Mediation

I requested mediation here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal#Philadelphia_County_and_other_Philadelphia_Pages --evrik | 15:56, 1 November 2005

Early history

I removed the 1669 date for Swedish settlement from the first paragraph, as I suspect it was much earlier. This: [1] suggests that the area was already settled as early as 1645. --Casu Marzu | 4:43, 11 November 2005

Education section; dress code for public schools

someone requested the source for phila schools dress code. here it is. Taco325i 05:21, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Link is no good--Looper5920 05:25, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

fixed it. Taco325i 05:42, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Actually, I was asking for a source of the "seldom enforced" part. WhisperToMe 05:43, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

ah sorry, should have read it more carefully. Taco325i 05:46, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

census detail

The US Census Update for 2004,(the American Factfinder Survey)estimated that Philly's population was 1.41 million. This hardly looks like a city whose population is growing. According to the census' current figures , Philly's population estimates for 2004 are as follows: Blacks 45.7%; whites 43%; Latinos 9.9%; Asians,5.2%; Pacific Islanders 0.2%; some other race 6.8%. Because these figures on race as on the ancestry area combined every designation that a person listed on the census form, the figures should add up to more tha 100%. For example a person who checked himself as Italian and Irish appeared in the total for both ancestry groups. Similarly, a person who checked Hispanic, white, and Black actually had herself added to all three "groups". It was assumed that if a person checked on any ancestry, or racial block than it was important to have that recognized. Two final notes: Latinos and Asians combined make up 15.1% of Philly's population, hardly a drastic increase compared to some other areas of the country . If you took the non-Hispanic whites alone/not in combination with any other racial(hey,I did not make up these categories), this group would only constitute 39.4% of Philly's population. Non-Hispanic whites ARE drastically decreasing in size from 1990 when they were an absolute majority of the city's population. collinss@earthlink.net

• The update in 2004 is not an actual census count. It just takes monthly sample surveys, current trends, and extrapolates them based on time and a bunch of math that does an okay (but not great) job of predicting what's going on. We won't really know until 2010. Many cities contest the updates, and they're often found to be pretty dead wrong. Anyway, I agree that Philly is probably still losing people, but the 2004 census estimate isn't something we should be using as gospel. Also, the census doesn't considers hispanic/latino to be a "race," it's an ethnic category Passdoubt | Talk 01:48, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Arabs?

Quote from the main article:

"The City's Arab population has tripled since 1990. With people of Turkish, Iranian, Iraqi, Saudi, Syrian, Lebanese, Pakistani, and Afghani backgrounds."

Of those nationalities listed, Turks, Iranians, Pakistanis and Afghanis are not considered to be Arabs. I don't know why it was written so.

I changed it to Middle Eastern, though I don't know how much Pakistan and Afghanistan are considered part of the Middle East. Anyway that whole section really needs to be referenced. MechBrowman 01:57, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

African Ancestry

There seems to be confusion over the largest ethnic group in Philadelphia. It is the ethnic group traditionally called African-American or Black who came to Philadelphia mostly during the 1940's and 1950's. It does not include descendants of immigrants from Jamaica, Haiti, Ghana, Ethiopa, etc. all of whom are of African Ancestry. I changed it to African American. (The children of these immigrants may or may not consider themselves African-Americans.)Actually the Black population has had a presence since the 18th century. Not all Black people refer to themselves as African-American for various reasons. In 2004, Puerto Ricans only made-up 6.6% of Philly's population. I changed the reference to Puerto Rican immigrants to Puerto Rican citizens which 1s what they are.

LA syndrome

Well it looks like this page suffers from the LA syndrome. Now i Regret that i ever tried to make any improvments. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 05:55, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Are you refering to the skyline Pic in the info box?? If so I was not sold on that either when I made the switch. It jusn't see very Philadelphia seeing as how we were never defined by our skyline. What do you think about throwing the Independence hall photo in the top of the box??--Looper5920 06:55, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Do what ever you want, i dont care, i dont monotor this page any more. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 07:04, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

No thoughts at all. Just high drama?--Looper5920 07:08, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

My Thoughts, they dont matter. GO back to the previous box, put what ever image you want at the top. But like i siad i dont monotor this page anymore, so you do what ever you want. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 07:13, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

I think the size of this article is becoming overwhelming. Consider condensing some of the sections, esp. the ones with long lists, and fitting them into sub-article pages so that the main article reads easier. --Pastricide! ^{Non-absorbing} 14:16, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Need Good Top Image!

I don't think this image is appropriate- while its true until recently Phila didn't have the most distinct/recognizable skyline, this Nighttime view wouldn't even be recognized by most natives, my self included!

I'd vote for a nice view down the Parkway, getting both City Hall and the recent Market St West towers. Redneb 01:35, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree that a daytime shot is needed but I definetly want to keep the skyline. I would love a pic from the top of the Mueseum steps down the parkway showing the skyline. I changed it to the Nightitme shot because it was the only good skyline photo I could fing in Wikipedia. There was a picture of Independence Hall up for ages but that always made me think of Philly as a quaint, small town and not on par with other major American cities. I wanted the picture to reflect that Philly is a modern American city. Yes we are still parochial, and we tend to hate everyone else just "because", but moving forward at the same time. Thoughts?--Looper5920 02:45, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Philadelphia skyline from the steps of the Art Museum

Above image, gentle crop

Above image, tight crop

Okay, it was so beautiful outside last week that I went for a walk with my camera, and tried specifically to take the the picture you folks are imagining. What do you think of this one?

I uploaded the full version for flexibility, but personally I'd crop it some before using it at the small sizes we're discussing (the version to the right is 250px wide, same as it would be in the infobox)...so that the Parkway and City Hall are more prominent. If anybody's interested, I can certainly upload a cropped version as well.

And so you know, there are a bunch of other Philly and Penn photos coming for your enjoyment shortly, once I figure out how to fix the rotation on the vertical shots. -- JVinocur 23:58, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, this is very doable. Great work! My ideal "top image" would be a straight-on shot of the Penn Tower with Swann Fountain in the foreground, probably near the Civil War memorial, around 21st or 22nd & the Parkway. You can still see enough of the newer buildings from that angle to indicate a modern city, but I think City Hall is a much more prominent landmark. This current photo here is too off-center for me, and doesn't really do the modern skyline justice at this angle; save Market West for another photo. Still, it's easily a better choice than the nighttime shot. Are we having a vote on this? Super speedy replace!!! As they say. Kudos. --Pastricide! ^{Non-absorbing} 17:11, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

"It's really a shame they didn't make City Hall as big as the other buildings downtown, isn't it?"

Do you like either of the cropped versions better? I tried to match more of what you describe, although of course I can't change the angle per se. -- JVinocur 20:19, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I think either of the cropped images will work. Closer is better, but from this angle, not too close. Tight crop is the best for me, but the gentle crop might be the better compromise. Keep up the good work. --Pastricide! ^{Non-absorbing} 22:28, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm not gutsy enough to make my own photo the top image, but if you like it enough, feel free.

Also, in case anyone watching this page doesn't also watch the Wikiproject, see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Philadelphia#A whole bunch of new Philly photos. -- JVinocur 21:50, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Ethnography

"Philadelphia has long been a Black and White city, with hardly any Asians or Hispanics to speak of. "

I'm not sure what this topic sentence is trying to get at. I'd like it written more objectively, like "since 19XX, Phila has had roughly equal percentages of black and white pop, with relatively smaller percentages Asian..." The word "hardly" is not objective, its a sloppy word to use in an encyclopedia,

Besides, I know living in Phila back in early 1980s, there was already a sizable Korean population centered on 5th and Olney. Redneb 15:55, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

cira center

Would it be proper to add the lovely Cira Center to the list of skyscrapers? just and idea 04:01, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Foods

Somebody, without comment, deleted my contribution of Snapper (snapping turtle) Soup, which I've found is virtually unknown outside the Philadelphia area & PA Dutch country. (Ask for "snapper soup" elsewhere and it'll be the red fish of the same name.) It's still sold (in cans) under the Bookbinder's brand. http://www.foodlocker.com/53007-5.html So here I'm commenting--shall we put it back? Also, how about the famous Philadelphia pepperpot? BillFlis 14:10, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

I can see why it was taken out; it doesn't quite seem like it's important enough to the city for the main Philadelphia article, especially with recent concerns over the size and bloat of articles in general and this one in particular. However, it seems like the food section as a whole is begging to be broken off into its own subarticle; such a contribution would be more than welcome there, and if you can amass a sufficient wealth of verifiable information, snapper soup can be its own article. Are you up to being bold and creating Cuisine of Philadelphia? (be sure to check out Cuisine of New York City, Cuisine of Toronto and Cuisine of the Pennsylvania Dutch for guidance.) --CComMack 16:54, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Wait, "Cuisine of Toronto"? OK, Toronto is a great city and all, very eclectic and diverse I hear, but Philly has hundreds of years of history here, with our own terrific ethnic influences. We haven't even touched on Philadelphia-style ice cream, which is the model for all modern American ice creams. I think we could have quite a long section on just Water Ice--I don't even see Radio Balls mentioned. OK, I'll go ahead and bust out a "Cuisine of Philly" page--it may be a bit ugly for a little while, but I guess that's what Wikipedia is all about, right? BillFlis 01:33, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

will help out with Cuisine of Philly once it gets started. and it's probably worth pointing out that Cuisine of New York City and Cuisine of the Pennsylvania Dutch probably both have something in common with Cuisine of Philadelphia -- the former because both are big multi-ethnic Northeastern cities (New York more so, admittedly) and the latter because a lot of Philadelphia's food has often come from the farms of the PA Dutch in and around Lancaster County. the list in this article is also, of course, a good place to start. Izzycat 02:29, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant to invoke Toronto as a style guide, not necessarily as a source of content. I apologize for the misunderstanding.  :-) --CComMack 21:04, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

No misunderstanding--I meant that if Toronto can have its own cuisine page, then surely Philly is also entitled. BillFlis 21:11, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

I found this in the food section: "Odunde is an major festival based on the Yoruba belief system in Nigeria and celebrated by African Americans in Philadelphia with about 20,000 people in attendance annually." I don't know anything about this, but it seems a bit out of place - is it a food-related festival - and should it be in the Annual fairs and events section? Chinesejewboy 03:34, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

skyscrapers

I've never heard that there was an actual law that buildings couldn't be higher than Penn's head. I had thought it was a gentleman's agreement, which somebody decided to break for the first time in the 80s... john k 08:18, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

That's my understanding too. Here: http://www.phila.gov/property/virtualcityhall/history.asp I found this: <quote>To reflect Philadelphia's importance, McArthur intended City Hall to be the tallest structure in the world. Unfortunately, City Hall never held that title because the Eiffel Tower and Washington monument were both completed before City Hall and both are taller than the building. Since neither of those structure are true buildings, Philadelphia's City Hall did remain the tallest occupied building until 1909, when New York built the Metropolitan Life Building. It was, however, the tallest building in Philadelphia until 1987, when a long-standing "gentlemen's agreement," discouraging constructing higher than Penn's hat, was broken with the construction of the sixty-one-story Liberty Place.</quote> BillFlis 10:50, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

I'd like to propose an order in which to list skyscrapers not yet built:

1. Under Construction (ground has been broken or is imminent)
2. In Planning (means the architects are hard at it)
3. Proposed (so might never make it, right?)

Within each group, ordered by expected date of completion, earliest first. I think this is more sensible than by height.--BillFlis 23:25, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Coordinates?

The coordinates in the heading don't match the ones in the data box. Actually, they're pretty far apart: a minute of latitude is about a mile, and a minute of longitude at this latitude is still not much short of a mile. Anybody got a GPS? I think the coordinates listed here should be those of City Hall. Certainly not the coordinates of the airport, part of which lies outside the city. BillFlis 11:29, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

The coordinates in the heading were the correct ones--googlemaps show them as City Hall. The coords in the infobox were somewhere in S. NJ, about halfway to the shore; I corrected those to match the heading.--BillFlis 21:40, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

And I removed the redundant repetition of the coordinates in the text. The coords are already in there twice.--BillFlis 22:04, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

OK, now the (decimal) coordinates that appear at the very top of the page (heading) are evidently incorrect. They don't match what's in the infobox, and what's more, when you click on them, you are taken to a page that refers to different coordinates with minutes & seconds. I don't know how to fix this.--BillFlis 16:16, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

The decimal coördinates at upper right of article, 39.998012 N -75.144793 W, denote a location somewhere around 8th and Indiana Ave in North Philadelphia; I verified this on two paper maps (to only the first decimal place) and one electronic (TopoZone): another way to describe it is just below the 40th parallel, and just to the left of 75 degrees longitude. Not sure if the Indiana Ave location was intentionally chosen (I might have selected City Hall or some other center city location), but this location is inside the city limits and not too far from what I suppose is the geographic center of the city. I'm not sure why the page brought up when one clicks on the coördinate numbers lists different numbers, but the maps brought up from that page, such as TopoZone, are centered in the area described on the original article page coördinates: 39.998012 N -75.144793 W. EdK 23:52, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Quaker City?

I'm from Philly and I've never, not once, even heard of the phrase "Quaker City", let alone someone referring to Philadelphia this way. Removing.

It's "Quaker City" according to The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2001-05. There are lots of organizations and companies in Philly that use the nickname: Quaker City Cab Co., ... Dart League, ... String Band, ... Rock Festival, etc. Here's some more sites using the term: http://www.miketodd.net/encyc/statenicks.htm http://www.sportingnews.com/archives/wilt/article9.html http://www.ushistory.org/tour/tour_stpete.htm The Phillies were called the Quakers until 1890. Convinced? --BillFlis 12:49, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

History

There's a separate article for history of the Philadelphia Eagles but there's no separate article for the history of Philadelphia? Geez, somebody w/ some knowledge needs to expand the history section onto its own article and shorten the blurb on this one...

Passdoubt | Talk 02:14, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

I have added a paragraph on the split amongst Philadelphia's population during the American Revolutionary War. 1777-1778 were momentous days in Philadelphia and feel this needs a mention--Lobsterback 09:36, 13 July 2006 (UTC). I've since changed that text a few times in an attempt to be even handed and not to upset any partisans amongst us. Please feel free to debate!--Lobsterback 13:41, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Inconsistent Area data

The area in the sidebar says

Area

Total 349.9 km²

Land 330.3 km²

Water 19.6 km²

But the Geography Section says

"the city has a total area of 369.4 km² (142.6 mi²). 349.9 km² (135.1 mi²) of it is land and 19.6 km² (7.6 mi²) of it is water"

(The above was an anonymous post.) Well, thanks for that, but what's the right answer? Citing a reference would be extra nice. On correction, I propose that since the data appears in the infobox, it doesn't need to be repeated in the text.--BillFlis 22:03, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

I dont know what the right answer is, I use wikipedia for all of my references.

Well, I guess you're out of luck on this one.--BillFlis 12:22, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Clark Park statue?

I have not been able to verify that Clark Park has a statue of Jonathan Swift. I have found several references that say that it has the only life-size statue of Charles Dickens in the world (and Little Nell!). http://www2.cruzio.com/~varese/dickens/statue.html http://www.clarkpark.info/AboutClarkPark.html Dickens has a connection with Philly (he famously once visited), but I don't know why we'd have Swift. Furthermore, this seems like an unnecessary detail in an article about the city. If someone wants to write an article about Clark Park, it would be more appropriate there.--BillFlis 12:22, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

It's Dickens. I've changed it. Izzycat 13:18, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Introduction

...is too long. Should be kept at two or three paragraphs at most; try not to elaborate too much on history or statistics. With the elongated table of contents, we already have enough white space as it is. --Pastricide! ^{Non-absorbing} 18:23, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

By the way: This article has a lot of good information on it, great pics, too. I know WP isn't paper, but this page is now almost twice as large as recommended. I'm not saying PANIC, just reconsider how much needs to go on one page. (I'd consider removing a few photos, as much as I like them all.) --Pastricide! ^{Non-absorbing} 18:32, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Buildings and architecture

In the interests of cutting down on the size of the main article, I created a new article for Buildings and architecture of Philadelphia and moved half of the information that was previously under Skyscrapers on the main page over to it. Please help add to this article and feel free to modify anything I've done with it. Passdoubt | Talk 02:16, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Sorry

I am new to using popups and I didn't know it would automatically save without edit summary or preview...Tom 14:20, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

New TV/Radio table?

Example table removed

Bad Idea, the article is way to big as it is, thing need to be removed rather then put in. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 04:58, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

• Agreed, also I feel that is something that would be more appropriate to put in the Delaware Valley article as it's not specific to the city (and what, about half of the TV stations don't even have studios in the city anymore?) Passdoubt | Talk 05:14, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
• Table removed to Delaware Valley article's talk page. Bill D 15:02, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

I still dont think thats a good idea, the Delaware Valley is not exact with the Philadelphia media market, as their are areas in the Philadelphia Market that are not in the Delaware Valley, and thaier are areas in the Delaware Valley that do not use Philadelphia as their primary for in market stations. Sections need to be spined off into new articles not into existing articles, so in the case for should be spinned into an article like Media in Philadelphia or similar title. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 05:10, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Skyline Image

Are there any objections to using one of JViocur's daytime photos as the top image? I think most of us would prefer these to a nighttime skyline so it at least appears more recognizable. Please comment here if you wish to revert to the old image or even use a new image entirely. Thank you. --Pastricide! ^{Non-absorbing} 21:24, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

• I agree the daytime photo would be better. I was the one that put the nighttime photo up there to begin with because it was the only decent skyline photo available at the time.--Looper5920 22:48, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Agree it looks better in the infobox then the nite photo, i though happen to like the night photo, but it needs to be displayed at a bigger size to be an effective image, would like to see it reused somewhere in the article. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 04:44, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
    • The latest skyline image is Image:PennCityHall.JPG. In my opinion, this image suffers from very drab coloration. I think the buildings portrayed are appropriate and the angle and cropping are well-chosen, but the colors make Philly seem so sad and depressing.Spikebrennan 13:39, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
      • Agree, i perfer the prvious image better. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 06:55, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

All-America City

Wow! I feel so excited to live in a city that's won the All-America City Award. I must have missed watching the news that day, so I didn't even know we won, and not only that but here I find we're in the All-America City Hall of Fame! Can you believe it? Low-down Philadelphia is an acknowledged All-America City, and we're not even close to the Mid-West. I'll bet Romans have been equally delighted to win the All-Italy City Award, or Muscovites the All-Russia City Award. What exactly did we do to win this, and how can other cities try to win? It's reassuring to know that, even if Philly burns to the ground or is incinerated in a nuclear holocaust, we'll still be remembered in the All-America City Hall of Fame.--BillFlis 00:20, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Can anyone identify this island?

I took this photo the other day, on approach to Philadelphia International Airport. It was a small plane making a lot of abrupt course changes, so I wasn't very well oriented...anyway, I've been staring at Google Maps for a while now, and I can't figure out what I took a picture of. (I'm pretty sure it's an island, although you can't actually confirm that from the photo since a little bit is cut off.) Any thoughts?  — JVinocur (talk • contribs) 23:44, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

It's an un-named New Jersey industrial island located in the Delaware River between the Ben Franklin and Betsy Ross Bridges. It is connected to Pennsauken, NJ by N. 36th Street. Hope this helps you find it. --Tom 00:34, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

It's called Petty Island. A google maps link (without the name) is here EdK 00:37, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I belive that it also had at one time a Citgo facality, either a refinery or a terminal, which has since cloced and most of which has been torn down. I recall reading in thr Inq or the DN, that their have been plas floated to re-develope the island to include housing, a hotel/confrence center and golf course, as well as a wildlife sancutary of come kind. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 06:48, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Great, thanks everybody. I didn't think to look so far from the airport (guess I didn't think about how fast planes fly). I see it's got some discussion in Pennsauken Township, New Jersey even if it doesn't have its own article, so I'll probably include that photo in my next Commons upload.  — JVinocur (talk • contribs) 09:32, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Here's a nice old reference.--BillFlis 12:00, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

My apoliges to Petty Island. Thanks! --Tom 13:41, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Paragraph edits

The end of the 3rd paragraph states "...with Benjamin Franklin playing an extraordinary role in Philadelphia's rise." but I don't think Philadelphia's colonial growth spurt can be attributed to Franklin. The Quakers instituted their liberal views - for the time - on freedom of religion which attracted settlers. Philadelphia was a portal for German immigrants thanks to the Quakers honoring their advertisement for cheap fertile farmland. And the local Indian tribes were generally amicable.--68.236.5.240 07:01, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Population inconsistency

The first paragraph states the population is 1,517,550. That is the figure according to the 2000 census, it appears. Also in the box on the right side of the page is a different figure, Population 1,470,151 as of 2004. My first reaction was that someone made a mistake while editing the article, so one or both of those numbers should probably be changed to be consistent. The government website for Philadelphia states that the population is '1.6 million' which I suppose they took they 2000 census number and rounded up.

I would suggest that a number around 1,500,000 or higher is probably most accurate. Especially considering this unfortunately titled NYTimes article which talks about how people are being priced out of NYC and discovering how Philly is a better place to live anyway. Dan 08:03, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

The 1,517,550 figure is the 2000 census count. The 1,470,151 is the 2004 mid-year estimate. (Yes, Philadelphia city has a negative growth rate). The suburbs, however, are growing. Most large US city articles use 2004 data in the infobox and mention both 2000 and 2004 figures in the main text, I think. Polaron | Talk 13:26, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

To maintain consistencey, the 2005 U.S. Census estimates (most recent) has been added into the intro and the infobox (in the addition to the figure that was already inserted in the "population history" box. The 2000 census figure (intro paragraph) was untouched for comparison purposes. The source of the 2005 figure is here. --Moreau36 23:19, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Dead link

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://www.sister-cities.org/
  • In Oakland, California on Fri Jun 23 14:39:28 2006, HTTP Error:
  • In Oakland, California on Fri Jun 23 23:15:02 2006, HTTP Error:
  • In Peoria, Arizona on Tue Jun 27 20:37:50 2006, HTTP Error:
  • In Peoria, Arizona on Fri Jun 30 14:17:41 2006, HTTP Error:

---

maru (talk) contribs 19:16, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Geographic References #6

I'm not sure what this should be, but 6 it isn't. Maybe it was, but if anyone edits Geographic references and adds another footnote the number will be wrong again. This needs a named rather than counted link somehow. -- SGBailey 14:40, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

• I'm not sure this is what you're looking for, but I found this page (about the evolution of the city's wards) from the City's website that states that "in the consolidation of 1854 by which the City and County became co-extensive." This is the URL in case you're interested: http://www.phila.gov/phils/docs/Inventor/graphics/wards/wards.htm.--- danntm ^talk 00:08, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

• • Maybe I'm not understanding the links, but in the article, go to para 2 and click the reference GR6. This takes you to Geographic_references#6 where I see a lot of numbered references. Click on reference number 6 and you go to http://www.statcan.ca/ - Canada? This can't be right. -- SGBailey 07:13, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

• • If it is intended that this is a link to county seats, why not link directly to that page? The destination and point of the GR6 link is not obvious - except in as much as I assume it is justifying the coterminous statement - but none of the possible destinations are immediately obvious as doing that. -- SGBailey 07:17, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Rugby?

Should teams engaging in rugby or "rugby league" be listed here? The other teams here are all pro, a couple of which are minor-league. From what I can gather, rugby league in the US is only semi-pro. We do include minor-league pro teams (e.g., Phantoms), but should we include semi-pro teams of sports that do not yet have any major league in the US as well? There is a bit of an edit war going on here—it would be good to air it out with some discussion. I have to say, I'm inclined to think the rugbites need to make their case. OTOH, I'm also a bit intimidated, because, as the old bumpersticker said, "Rugby Players Eat Their Dead".--BillFlis 23:20, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

FWIW, I'm in full agreement that 1) the Rugby teams should not be listed here (but maybe at the a sports subpage), 2) that further discussion should take place here, and 3) I am intimidated by many Rugby players.  :-) --CComMack (t&#149;c) 05:47, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

As Philadelphia is the home of US rugby league and almost 10,000 watched the US lead Australia for over an hour a couple of years ago, yes it should be on here (Braxiatel).

Rugby league is a different sport to rugby union by the way. Rugby league broke away from union in 1895 as they wanted to pay their players and union wanted to stay amateur. Union became professional only in 1995. They have now evolved into very different sports, rugby league being closer to your American Football - it's like a faster version with no padding in fact (Braxiatel).

Hmm, your strident claims are making me skeptical. The "rugby league" article says that Huddersfield, England is where rugby league was founded. Has its home now moved to Philly? What are they playing in England now? Also, it seems that the rugby league teams in the US are only semi-professional, not professional as you claim. I'm hoping that you can provide a reference to the contrary. Wait: "your American football", you say? Where are you?--BillFlis 00:51, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Braxiatel, 10,000 is an exaggeration, if you refer to the Liberty Bell Cup, it was 5,000, and 99% of them were Australian ex-pats. As for the discussion, i must correct people regarding the teams as they are not semi-pro, they are amateur. Rugby (or rugby union) has semi-pro teams (Philadelphia Whitemarsh play in the Superleague, they are semi-pro). Whereas rugby league is fairly new in the states, and probably should not be listed, at least not presently anyway.

Apologies - I meant to say home of US rugby league - that was a typo on my part (Braxiatel).

I have never even heard of the "rugby" teams. I don't care if they're "professional" or not. Glen Mills, while it is a suburb, is not Philadelphia. Put the team on the page for Glen Mills, PA. If one doesn't exist, make one. But keep the rugby teams off the page, please. While it is obvious you are a fan of the sport, it does not qualify to be listed as a main Philadelphia sport, let alone team. Just because a team is "professional" and plays in Philadephia or the surrounding area doesn't justify a place on this page. Let's stick with the sports in this town that people know about. (Darthflyer)