Talk:Brownsville, Texas

Brownsville, Texas has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: December 8, 2019. (Reviewed version).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Brownsville, Texas article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

United States: Texas Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Texas portal This article is supported by WikiProject Texas (assessed as High-importance).

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by Twofingered Typist, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on January 26, 2019.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors

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

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Bsoyka (talk · contribs) 00:53, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Heya! Looks like this has been nominated for quite some time, so I'm going to try to take it up. —Bsoyka ^talk 00:53, 2 December 2019 (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.	Prose looks great to me!
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Complies with MoS
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.	Many good citations, no issues
	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).	All citations are from reliable sources
	2c. it contains no original research.	Contains no original research
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	No copyvios from what I can tell
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Addresses main aspects clearly and concisely
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Focuses on the city and its history very well, doesn't really stray away
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Written with a very neutral and encyclopedic tone
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	No significant issues with edit warring, etc.
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.	All images are licensed with either Creative Commons or public domain
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	All images are relevant and have well-written, accurate captions
	7. Overall assessment.	I believe a lot of great work has been put into this article, and it has great value for those who read it. As such, I am completing this review. This article is now a Good Article. —Bsoyka ^talk 02:23, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

Brownsville Collage.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:53, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Brownsville Collage.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:08, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 16 February 2025

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Andrewa (talk) 08:39, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Brownsville, Texas → Brownsville
Brownsville → Brownsville (disambiguation)

– Brownsville, Texas, is by far the largest and most notable of places with this name, and hence arguably the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. The majority of the other "Brownsville" are unincorporated places, or even former names of places now named something else, and none of the other Brownsvilles are anywhere near as populous or important. SomethingForDeletion (talk) 03:40, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose 1st, support 2nd per nom. Not sure about WP:USPLACE, but i assume that Brownsville isn't included at AP Style Guide. So, retargeting "Brownsville" to Brownsville, Texas is more necessary (partially also due to it isn't relatively known compared to NY, LA). 103.111.102.118 (talk) 04:19, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose All. A direct page move to Brownsville would violate WP:USPLACE, which it is also explained on Wikipedia:Perennial proposals#Remove state from US placenames. A majority of reliable sources published nationally in the US would append the state as if it was common usage in American English. And always appending the state produces a consistent and predictable set of titles (see also WP:TITLECON), because repeated or otherwise ambiguous placenames are very common in the US, and thus most would require disambiguation regardless (the placenames currently listed on the Brownsville disambiguation page is one example). The only cities that do not seem to have this peculiar convention seem to be those 28 or so cities (like Dallas and Houston) listed by that AP Stylebook But take almost all other cities and communities in the state and nationally published reliable sources would still refer to them as "[X, Texas]" regardless of any unnecessary disambiguation here on Wikipedia. On the other hand, making Brownsville a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT would be permitted, but Brownsville, Brooklyn -- the district in Brooklyn in New York City -- may also claim to have about the same relative long-term significance under WP:PT2, looking at that article's current length and over 200 references. And looking at the pageviews[1], it could be debatable whether a daily average ratio of about 720 to 390 indicates that the Texas city is much, much more likely than the Brooklyn/New York City district to be sought after by readers per WP:PT1 (I myself would have preferred a higher statistically significant ratio than that approximate 7/4). Therefore, I would prefer to error on the current status quo and keep it as a WP:NOPRIMARY. Zzyzx11 (talk) 12:38, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, no primary topic. See Brownsville, Brooklyn, among others. 162 etc. (talk) 19:53, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is relevant that one is a neighborhood, and as such doesn't amount to much legally, while the other is an incorporated city with over three times the population, which is also the seat of its county (and largest city thereof), a principal city of its MSA, and also forms the US half of an important crossborder metro region (Brownsville–Matamoros). Brownsville, Brooklyn, is just yet another New York City neighborhood, and while New York City itself is obviously very famous, and even its boroughs, Brooklyn's Brownsville doesn't really have any claim to fame (unlike some of other NYC neighborhoods like Harlem in Manhattan, or even some of Brooklyn's much more notable neighborhoods such as Williamsburg.) SomethingForDeletion (talk) 15:58, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Closing comment: With 38 entries in the DAB, all but two of them with articles, the chance of one of them being either much more likely than any other single topic, and more likely than all the other topics combined—to be the topic sought when a reader searches for that term is IMO slim, or having substantially greater enduring notability and educational value than any other topic associated with that term to also be slim. It's true that it does have a population of 186,738 according to the article, but Brownsville, Brooklyn has a population of 58,300 just for one... how do the populations of the others stack up? I'm guessing that there are far more people in the other Brownsvilles, taken together, than in this one. The closure is based on there being no prospect of consensus to move, in fact there's no support for a move at all, but I think it's also clear why there's no such support. Andrewa (talk) 08:39, 23 February 2025 (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.