Talk:Fayetteville, Arkansas

Fayetteville, Arkansas was a Geography and places good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
July 20, 2013	Good article nominee	Not listed
January 28, 2017	Peer review	Reviewed

Current status: Former good article nominee

United States: Arkansas Mid‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Arkansas portal This article is supported by WikiProject Arkansas (assessed as Top-importance).

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

Important Tips Before Editing This Article

Please review the following to get a better idea of what you should add to this article:

Please follow the Wikipedia USCITY guideline for layout and content.
Please examine these great articles for ideas: Lock Haven, Pennsylvania / Stephens City, Virginia / Kent, Ohio / Tulsa, Oklahoma / Grand Forks, North Dakota.
Please ensure a person meets Wikipedia Notability requirements before adding to the "Notable People" section.

Please review the following before editing:

Please document your source by citing a reference to prove your text is verifiable.
Please add text that has a neutral point of view instead of sounding like an advertisement.
Please read the "Editing, Creating, and Maintaining Articles" chapter from the book Wikipedia : The Missing Manual, ISBN 9780596515164.

• Sbmeirow • Talk • 03:45, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

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

Clintons

Bill & Hillary Clinton certainly aren't current residents. They apparently were residents primarily for the two years between his gubernatorial terms. Do they really belong on the list?

I do know Bill taught at the University of Arkansas (located in Fayetteville, AR) for awhile, so I would consider them notable past residents of the city. (also, please sign your comments with 4 ~ symbols in the future, so it looks like mine at the end after this comment) Cardsplayer4life 18:36, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The house they got married in is on California street, and they lived in it for a while, so I'd say that they belong on the list. Also, they frequently have come back to town (I can think of multiple instances in the past 5 years), which means that it is still an important place to them. Hillary also talks about it being important in her Autobiography (I haven't read his). Jon 06:53, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is a sign as you enter Fayetteville that reads, "First home of Bill and Hillary Clinton." It was the first home they lived in married. Hillary also practiced law in Fayetteville. Chris 03:11, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is that sign still there? I seem to remember them removing it. At least, I haven't noticed it in going to Fayetteville anymore. --SeizureDog 08:46, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As of 18:31, 1 March 2008 (UTC) the sign is still there. BillyClubThorton (talk) 18:31, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Census

I added info on Fayetteville's 2006 special census. ~aerotive

Could you provide a reference please? (Cardsplayer4life 17:33, 27 June 2006 (UTC))[reply]

This is the closest I could find to a citation for the updated population count provided by aerotive: http://www.nwarktimes.com/nwat/News/41735/

It's from the local Fayetteville paper. Someone else will need to decide if it's citation worthy and if they think it is to actually do the citation as I don't know how.

Looks good, I added it in. Thanks (Cardsplayer4life 10:01, 6 July 2006 (UTC))[reply]

two censuses in intro?

Since we have the new June 2006 census data, is there any reason we need to keep the 2000 data in the intro? It's mentioned in the Demographics section. askewchan 18:06, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

bully reference

Recent developments as shown here [1] seem to indicate the the reports of bully behavior are not accurate and that the reported victim has, himself, a history of being a bully. For that reason I edited the sentence in the article.--Phyllis1753 (talk) 16:01, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Its not a far stretch to see the victim turning into a bully as a result of such treatment. Regardless, I wasn't entirely comfortable with the information posted in the article, much less in the lead.~ (The Rebel At) ~ 23:43, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you about the issue being in the lead paragraph or, even, as part of the article. --Phyllis1753 (talk) 00:29, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Fayetteville Historic Square

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was to not merge. Brandonrush (talk) 15:31, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why would these pages be merged? Brandonrush Woo pig sooie 23:32, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose distinct district of Fayetteville, no need to merge. Brandonrush Woo pig sooie 23:03, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Historical info

If anyone needs some historical information, there is a very large amount on this website http://fayettevillehistory.typepad.com/main/. It is edited by Charlie Alison who is an officer of the Washington County Historical Society and a staff of the UofA. It has information from founding in 1828 - present talking about timeline, people, maps, events, railroad, etc. Jacob102699 (talk) 15:36, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Fayetteville, Arkansas/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Retrolord (talk · contribs) 09:19, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to review this. ★★Retro Lord ★★ 09:19, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please mark items with Done if you feel you have dealt with them. ★★Retro Lord ★★ 09:32, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Outcome

The article requires significant work on references, and as such I am going to have to fail the article. I'll provide a copy of the article bolding all areas lacking references, so that you can work on it. I'll also be happy to conduct the next GA review should you re-nominate, allowing you to skip some of the lengthy waiting time. If you have any questions feel free to ask me or WT:GAN. Thanks! ★★Retro Lord ★★ 09:38, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review

I made a few edits to the lead to remove some content that was not mentioned elsewhere in the article. ★★Retro Lord ★★ 09:32, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"is the county seat of Washington County and the third-largest city in Arkansas" Would you consider reversing the sentence, to put "third-largest" first? Is it more important that the city is the county seat, or the third largest? ★★Retro Lord ★★ 09:32, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"75,102 at the 2011 estimate" We are straying a bit into recentism land here. I think the 2010 census is enough, especially for the lead. ★★Retro Lord ★★ 09:32, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am willing to make changes you suggest in order to improve the article. The sentences you mention below have been fixed (I believe). Thanks for your time and efforts! Brandonrush Woo pig sooie 00:44, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	"which is the flagship university in the state" This sentence comes across a bit awkwardly. Unless you can rephrase it, could we remove it? " go to Fayetteville for home" Would that be as tourists, or to study at the university full time?
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	"complexion" Not too sure thats the right word here. Demographics, perhaps?
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.

edited the climate section

Since Fayetteville lies entirely within the Humid Subtropical climate zone, it is not necessary to mention that it has minor influence from the Humid Continental climate type. Also, the Wikipedia pages from other cities in the South with this climate type and similar temperatures (such as Nashville) don't mention the Humid Continental climate type at all, so putting that reference in here creates inconsistency. 207.224.79.12 (talk) 20:30, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Fayetteville, Arkansas. 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:08, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 29 external links on Fayetteville, Arkansas. 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) 07:47, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Fayetteville, Arkansas. 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk
Corrected formatting/usage for http://factfinder2.census.gov/
Corrected formatting/usage for http://poultryscience.uark.edu/4457.htm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.faylib.org/information/history.asp
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.accessfayetteville.org/government/parks_and_recreation/parks/wilson_park.cfm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.accessfayetteville.org/government/parks_and_recreation/trails_and_greenways/scull_creek_trail.cfm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.accessfayetteville.org/government/parks_and_recreation/documents/maps/2011_TrailsGuideBro_%28Final%29.pdf
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.accessfayetteville.org/government/city_council/index.cfm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.solartraininghq.com/solar-training-heads-south-to-the-home-of-the-razorbacks-in-fayetteville-arkansas
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.accessfayetteville.org/government/utilities_department/index.cfm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110918233129/http://www.co.washington.ar.us/Archives/1908PlatBook/1908PlatBook74.pdf to http://www.co.washington.ar.us/Archives/1908PlatBook/1908PlatBook74.pdf

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

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:49, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fayetteville, Arkansas. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120316123608/http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/bulletins/b10-02.pdf to http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/bulletins/b10-02.pdf

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) 00:04, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Regional sports teams

I think there is some merit to mentioning the Ozark United FC on the page, as they ARE meant to represent the Northwest Arkansas region as a whole, including Fayetteville. Edit wars aren't exactly constructive. Pinkhaze.l (talk) 15:27, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies for starting the edit war. I agree with you, though, that Ozark United, like the Naturals, is clearly representing ALL of Northwest Arkansas. Either both should be allowed to remain on the Sports section for this reason, or if it needs to be limited to only sports taking place in Fayetteville then both should be removed. Afcnwa (talk) 22:00, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]