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

It has been proposed in this section that multiple pages be renamed and moved.

A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.

Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly.

Links: current log • target log • direct move

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 Manhattan's neighborhoods which arguably do). SomethingForDeletion (talk) 20:08, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]