Talk:Tulsa, Oklahoma/Archive 1

Of note right now

Tulsa's been featured in Stars and Stripes! It's the military newspaper that caters to US forces overseas in Europe, the MidEast, and the Pacific. Tulsa got a full-page feature in the travel section... check out page 35 of the April 6 issue, European edition. You can download a PDF from this link (will disappear in roughly a week, 9 MB download).--DUc0N 07:30, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

The Tulsan

UPDATE 12/7/05: INASMUCH [UNNAMMED] REFUSES TO ALLOW ME TO EDIT THE DISCUSSION BELOW, AN UPDATE: As the sole proprietor and and editor of TheTulsan, I am sincerely thankful that no further attacks have been forthcoming from Mr. Ironic Last Name (that is a joke, hahaha!) My advice regarding moving to T-town or Oklahoma has changed: I encourage all brave Americans of strong heart and fierce independence to move here and join the struggle! It is amazing to me that Mr. Ironic Last Name thinks the discussion about his failed attempts to censor lil' ol' meeee is worthy of archiving . . . I move to delete the discussion regarding who (indeed) kept removing TheTulsan. UPDATE 12/13/05: I 2nd the motion . . .

Whoever keeps editing out the link to The Tulsan needs to get a life. This is what one gets, people, in Tulsa. These people think the world revolves around them, and if anything is done to challenge them they are as close-minded as one would expect any podunk backwater to be. I have debated all comers on all forums available, and the opposition loses every time. My advice to anyone thinking of moving to Tulsa or Oklahoma is DO NOT DO IT. The town is dying, the state is backward, and a lot of the people are the self-righeous narrow-minded clods one would expect.

See the above section. I should also make you aware of our Wikipedia:Three revert rule and Wikipedia:No personal attacks policy. Also, if you vandalize this talk page once more I will block you. -- Hadal 16:45, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Obviously I agree with the removal, as I did it first. Move to keep thetulsan.com off wikipedia. Danlovejoy 16:49, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Well, sure you do Dan. I have been critical of your right-wing agenda, your friends, and your party. If The Tulsan is soooooo awful, why did I have to beg your right-wing buddy Michael Bates to remove it from his site after it had been there for YEARS? I apologize for defacing your comments, misguided or not. It was wrong of me to express my frustration by removing his attempt to cast dispersions on my abilities and usefulness of The Tulsan. That is ssoooooooo Tulsa Whirled of you Dan!

You keep using that word. I do not think it means, what you think it means. I understand how having your site removed could be frustrating and make you want to lash out, but I would implore you to moderate your tone for the sake of congeniality.

My ideological leanings and associations are not relevant to this discussion, but you really have gotten them wrong nonetheless. I don't even live in Tulsa, and I had never heard of you before I deleted your link from the Tulsa entry. I have met Michael Bates one time, but I don't really understand (nor care about) his role in this "controversy." We don't speak regularly. I don't have any particular agenda with regard to Wikipedia, and my poltical leanings are not so simply distilled as "right wing," although that is a convenient label.

The great thing about the web is that anyone can put up any old tripe they want. That's why I'm allowed a site! But it also means that people can pick and choose what they link to. I think the community will agree with me that your site doesn't meet Wikipedia standards. However, since you accuse me of ideological bias, I will not remove your link again. Someone else should, and probably will. Danlovejoy 20:18, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Inasmuch as these comments are for the record, please note: Dan LIED when he told Wikipedia that 'most of the links are broken.' Which brings us to the second LIE, that the 17th was the first time he had seen The Tulsan, he in fact defamed The Tulsan on the 11th when he also deleted the site. Which begs the question, Danny-boy: ya see something one time, and decide it is unworthy, unprofessional, profane, and non-notable? Quick study, guy! Dan, I am willing to let this go, but I am very angry at your behaviour, and wonder if the OC knows how you are spending your time picking on lil' me. An apology would go far in helping me get over this. :)

PLEASE leave the discussion intact rather than just chopping out sections from the middle so no one knows who said what, or when.

Well, lovely. Now we have veiled threats. My edit history is open for anyone to view (including my boss). The site I removed on the 11th was ShopTulsa.com, as you would have seen instantly if you had bothered to look. As for your threat, I feel pretty good about my position at my work, so if you'd like to write to my boss and ask her "how she feels about [me] spending my time picking" on you, I encourage you to do so. Trust me, you are not even close to the craziest person she's ever dealt with. Danlovejoy 02:54, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Oooooooohhhhh . . . I see it now. Sorry for the misunderstanding! My bad! You did not delete thetulsan on the 11th or say that it is mostly non-working links. I issue total retraction on the remarks above. Your job is safe! :)

NOTE: I added a 'k' to the word 'working' in the post above

Someone decided to remove the "demorilizing"(sic) comment at the top of this thread. I have reverted. In case that person is reading this: Please consider the talk page inviolate unless you have an EXTREMELY compelling reason to edit it. It's a record of the consensus (or lack thereof) that brought us to the current article.

Entertainment and Attractions section

I've made a major edit, in an attempt to start pulling together sections and miscellaneous mentions of things to do in Tulsa. I hope, by pulling it all together, it will make the article flow better and make it easier for readers to get a comprehensive overview of Tulsa's offerings. --N35w101 08:35, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

America's Most Beautiful City?!

Does anyone know the source of this motto? I found some indication that it was a Readers' Digest contest in the 1950s. I'm dubious of superlatives and wonder if anyone has heard Tulsa called "America's Most Beautiful City." Danlovejoy 00:47, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

• A quick Google turned up a whole plethora of cities claiming that motto, even some in Canada. Interestingly, Tulsa was the first hit. I've never heard of Tulsa being referred to in that way before.--N35w101 17:53, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Excerpt from editorial, "Tulsa can compare with best U.S. cities" by Jim Sellars, 9/30/1992, The Tulsa Tribune

"A little research revealed that the title of America's most beautiful city came from a 1957 Reader's Digest article, a bit of happy puffery that was the payoff for some attentive wining and dining of the author by local civic and business leaders. There also was a nugget of truth in that article which is extremely important for this city today, and it has nothing to do with titles.

"Tulsa east of the Arkansas River in 1957 didn't go much beyond 41st Street, much past Sheridan to the east, or Pine Street on the north. Visitors saw a tight little town dominated by the ostentatious, baronial mansions built in the '20s, when oil was king and Tulsa's other title, Oil Capital of the World, made more sense."

TulsaTV 19:50, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

A 1957 Chamber of Commerce magazine-style brochure ("Tulsarama") uses the title. The Reader's Digest reference was in the June 1957 issue, if I recall, and said that Tulsans claimed the title of "America's Most Beautiful City" -- not that they'd been awarded the crown. I remember hearing the phrase used through the late '70s as I grew up in Tulsa. Michael Bates -- 07:25, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Hi Michael! Good to see you on the Wikipedia. Glad people could make that clear. Tulsa IS a beautiful city. Danlovejoy 20:40, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Americas most beautiful city? I think this is highly laughable, I am surprised Americas most beautiful city has virtually no tourists.

Count Basie in Greenwood in 1927? Doubtful.

Hard to believe that 6 years after the burning of Greenwood that it was rebuilt enough to include a dance club that would be the site where Count Basie decided to 'focus on jazz'. I think this merits an actual reference.

LOl! Tulsa is one of America's stinkiest cities! You can smell the feces from Riverside for miles away. The stench of that river is as sickening as the bigoted, fundamentalist society it flows by.

I have to agree

RE: Count Basie in Greenwood in 1927? Doubtful.

Actually, Basie began playing jazz after that visit in Tulsa, being impressed by some local pioneering jazz performers. And the odor of the Arkansas River had nothing to do with it, I'm sure. But considering how quickly the Empire State Building was erected, why is six years not enough time to establish ONE night club? Go play in the traffic, kiddo.

Shameless!

I love Tulsa. Spent half of my life there - off and on.

But! Wikipedia in not a commercial or a Chamber of Commerce presentation. As this article currently stands, it reads like a brochure. There is no doubt that most of the info, facts, figures, etc. need to be here and available, but without all of the spin.

The descriptions of some of the districts and neighborhoods are fine(need a little more current info), but the sections on 'Midtown' and 'South Tulsa' are embarassing. If I didn't know better I would think I was reading a 'Dining & Shopping Guide' pamphlet. Pottery Barn?! Krispy Kreme?! You should be ashamed. Don't misunderstand me, I love to shop there and eat donuts with the rest of the yuppies, but this stuff does not belong here unless it contributes to the article. I found at least three exclamation marks(!) - with very specific exception, these don't belong in articles on Wikipedia! Except on Talk pages! Everyone knows that inventive small businesses are going to try to slip in a blurb now and then about 'Joe Bob's Used Cars', but this stuff is blatent and systematic commercial propaganda. Shameless!

And, while I'm on my box, if you don't know anything about a certain part of town (probably because you don't go there), then don't patronize the people who do live and work there. Leave that section blank and invite others to add to that section. Don't just spout out the first thing that comes to your mind. Why? Because it comes off like: "here's the black side of town, and, oh yeah, over here are the Mexicans". I now what the author was trying to say, but that's not how it came out.

I will continue to work on this page and try to make it worthy of the Great City of Tulsa, but others with knowledge and resources in these area need to be found to contribute. If you have verifiable facts, by all means, contribute. If you have spin, get a job with the Chamber of Commerce or the Tourism Office. If you support or have a legitimate arguement in opposition to this article, by all means speak up. I am always up for a good debate and not afraid to admit when I'm wrong.--Master Scott Hall 19:29, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Why Tulsa Companies are better than any other cities

Its really a great place to live

I dont know how great it is, Phillip Petroleum, Citgo, Sunoco, Vintage, Wiltel bought out by Level3(they didnt buy the building) plus many more have left. if Williams and American Airlines go South the city is in big trouble,because they are all Tulsa has right now other than a small metal fabrication industry.

Its great if you enjoy the boring life and life on the "plains" they don't call it the plains for nothing.

Williams Co.

Williams energy company is rumored to be moving their headquarters to Houston Texas in coming years, They already occupy 40 stories in the Williams Tower in Houston.

Demographics

In connection with the 1921 Race Riot, I see you returned the comment about Tulsa being "still geographically divided between predominately poor and African-American north Tulsa, and predominately wealthy and white south Tulsa."

While this is true in a very general sense, it is misleading to single Tulsa out compared with other U. S. cities. I discussed this with a good African-American friend who lives on the north side. She pointed out that new, nice houses are being built all the time in north Tulsa, that it is not all black, and that south Tulsa is a mix.TulsaTV 13 Apr 2004

Basically, the question to ask is, is the statement "still geographically divided between predominately poor and African-American north Tulsa, and predominately wealthy and white south Tulsa" factual? Our task as Wikipedians is to report, not to judge, hence the NPOV policy. It is true that "new, nice houses are being built all the time in north Tulsa, that it is not all black, and that south Tulsa is a mix"; however, that is precisely why the word "predominantly" appears in the statement, to qualify it as a tendency rather than as an absolute. There can be no doubt that the statement does accurately describe general trends in Tulsa; visit City Hall and ask for demographic maps collected by the records department which will confirm that north Tulsa, in general, has a much higher African-American population and a much lower average income level than south Tulsa. --Lowellian 20:16, Apr 13, 2004 (UTC)

Re the question of whether Tulsa is "still geographically divided between predominately poor and African-American north Tulsa, and predominately wealthy and white south Tulsa":

Again, in general, it is somewhat true, however, the real question is whether it is pronounced in comparison with other cities in the Midwest region. If not, then to report it this way (following the history of the 1921 Race Riot) is misleading. Do you believe Tulsa is segregated to an unusual degree? My friend in north Tulsa, who is a world traveller and native Tulsan long a resident of north Tulsa, disagrees, and so do I.

I see that the entry for Washington, D.C. does not make note of its sharp geographical/socioeconomic/racial lines. Should this be noted? Would it be more significant in light of the fact that Washington had a race riot in 1919?

By the way, could I ask you to sign and date all your comments? Thank you.

Moving on to the topic under discussion: When cities exhibit clear demographic trends linked to geography, then, yes, I believe the article for the city should contain the information. This includes Washington, DC, and other major cities in the United States with such clear demographic trends. I am not attempting to "single out" Tulsa; rather, I have contributed to the Tulsa article in the past and am simply trying to make the information there more complete. I have not added information about demographics to cities with which I am less familiar with the demographic trends.

Notice that Wikipedia is a work in progress, and most of its articles are not really complete. For example, the fact that a bibliography has not yet been written for the article on one famous author does not mean that it should not be written for the article on another famous author.

--Lowellian 19:31, Apr 14, 2004 (UTC)

There is an abundance of data on segregation in U.S. cities at http://www.censusscope.org/us/s40/rank_dissimilarity_white_black.html. The white-black dissimilarity index shows Tulsa rated as 60.3. By comparison, Austin is 60.9, Oklahoma City is 61, Wichita is 63, all very slightly more segregated than Tulsa (Washington, D.C. is 81.5). Therefore the statement that Tulsa is "still geographically divided between predominately poor and African-American north Tulsa, and predominately wealthy and white south Tulsa" is erroneous and misleading. I intend to remove it unless you have a cogent response to this information. TulsaTV 13:42, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Check your link again. It actually shows Oklahoma City at 59.0, below Tulsa. And if you check Kansas, Wichita is 59.4, also below Tulsa.

Most large American cities are segregated to some extent (which is precisely why the terms "ghettoes" and "inner city" have the connotations they do in the United States). The question here is not whether an area that has a statistically significant larger percentage of a particular racial or ethnic group exists (as at least one such area clearly does exist in most large American cities), but where that area is. Depending on the city, it could be in the east, the west, the north, or the south. In Tulsa, the area with the larger African-American population is the north. Just because other cities are also segregated does not mean that Tulsa is not. 60.3 is still a fairly high number; it is well above 50, and places Tulsa second in Oklahoma, only behind Muskogee. And like I said earlier, just because other cities do not yet have such kinds of information does not mean that they should not have such information, because Wikipedia is a work still in progress.

However, maybe we could change the statement somewhat. Consider this proposal: Move the statement away from the Tulsa Race Riot discussion (so as not to imply that one led to the other). Instead, move it into the Demographics section and rephrase the statement into something along the lines of "Much of the African-American population of Tulsa lives in the northern part of the city, which has a lower average income than the rest of the city." --Lowellian 18:04, Apr 18, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the correction on those dissimilarity indices. It was a honest mistake. My point was not that the other cities named were significantly more segregated, but that the numbers were very close. That is still true with the corrected figures.

Re your proposed statement, "Much of the African-American population of Tulsa lives in the northern part of the city...":

"Much" implies to me at least 50%, possibly as much as 80% or so. Is there any factual basis for an assertion even this broad? I would agree that north Tulsa (defined even at its broadest, as the area north of Admiral) has a higher proportion of African-Americans that other broad sectors of Tulsa, but not necessarily "much" of the A-A population.

The area north of Admiral today is large and diverse. TulsaTV 18:44, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

On further reflection, the term "north Tulsa" usually implies not the entire area north of Admiral, but historical north Tulsa, i.e., north of downtown Tulsa and not more than a few miles to the east. I still don't see any data supporting the "much" statement. The only other relevant link I can find is http://www.censusscope.org/us/m8560/chart_exposure.html, but it doesn't really answer the question. Your statement above, "In Tulsa, the area with the larger African-American population is the north," is undoubtedly true, but the stronger assertion "Much of the African-American population of Tulsa lives in the northern part of the city..." is not yet supported. TulsaTV 08:56, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I'm surprised not much information on the city's Native Americans. Tulsa is one of the largest urban Indian communities in the U.S. Prominent Native Americans in Tulsa whether in tribal group or by descent include Thomas Gilcrease, Oral Roberts and Will Rogers. I believe the statistic of 4.5 percent of the city's population is an understatement. Perhaps only those in Native American tribal organizations are counted in the U.S. Census report, because the number of those with part Native American descent could well be more numerous. Tulsa has a long history as a community with Native roots from its' days in Indian Territory before statehood came in 1907. --Mike D 26 07:45, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Famous Tulsans

This section could be cleaned up and reformatted in a vertical list, instead of one jumbled paragraph. Milk 15:55, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I have removed Tim Quigley, founder of OverXposure.FM from "Famous Tulsans." As far as I can tell, neither he, nor his radio station (which I'm sure is prefectly cromulent) is noteworthy for the purposes of the Wikipedia. His name shows up on the third page of a Google search for "Tim Quigley." Given the unusual nature of his name, if he were famous, don't you think he'd be higher in the rankings? Anyone disagree? Danlovejoy 16:20, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Actually, Tim Quigley's name shows up on the first page as the first result of a Google search. He may not be a household name, but he is a pioneer in chillout radio format.

Hmm.. This is what I turn up as the first result in my Google[1]:

Timothy P. Quigley

Timothy P. Quigley, CPA, CCIM VICE PRESIDENT. Tim Quigley joined NAI Cohen-Esrey’s

Office Properties Group in 1998, and very quickly learned the skills of ...

And Tulsa's Tim Q is still not on the first page of results. Strange. Can you post a link to your search? (see mine above) Danlovejoy 02:35, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Tulsa's Tim Quigley was the first result that day. Today it is the fourth (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%2tim+quigley%22) but is STILL on the first page of search results. Furthermore, this is hardly a way to gauge someone's "importance" in the world arena. Just return the Tim Quigley listing on the Tulsa page as it was originally presented, please. Our having this dispute in the first place only proves the flimsiness of this judgement. And BTW: What happened to the Perriman Family article that was linked to from this page? What was the matter with that article? Did your Google searches not prove enough to you about the founding family of the city of Tulsa? (and no I am not at all related)

I don't know anything about the Perriman article. I did find Tim Quigley's personal site after putting in "Tim Quigley" with quotes. It's the fourth result at the moment. It appears that he has styled himself as a celebrity, and he does run a web radio station. But that doesn't make him famous. This looks an awful lot like self-promotion to me.

Our having this dispute in the first place only proves the flimsiness of this judgement. - The existence of a dispute doesn't automatically validate the viewpoint of one party to the dispute. If you continue to disagree, you should feel free to register and look into the dispute resolution process. If I'm overruled, I'll certainly get over it. Danlovejoy 15:10, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Would it be appropriate to link, somewhere, Roy_D._Mercer? Granted, it is a fictional character. However, considering there is an article on Wikipedia, there are a dozen nationally-marketed CDs, and a mention on CMT's web, could "he" get a mention? N35w101 20-jul-2005

If he's a famous fictional character that's clearly associated with Tulsa (not just as a passing mention in his backstory, for example) I would not be opposed to including him. Would he be in Famous People, or perhaps a new section, "Tulsa in Pop Culture?" I would prefer more guidance from more experienced Wikipedians before I would make this change. However, do as you wish. Be Bold! Danlovejoy 16:28, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

Hmm. I like the idea of "Tulsa in Pop Culture". That section could also mention films taking place in/around Tulsa, etc. Perhaps even the entertainment-oriented Famous Tulsans could reside there? Thanks for the exhortation to be bold. However, I'm brand-spanking new to Wikipedia. There's bold and then there is reckless. N35w101 21-jul-2005

There certainly would enough material for a "Tulsa in Pop Culture article". Off the top of my head I, there's Bob Wills and "Take me Back to Tulsa", Don Williams and "Tulsa Time" (plus the Eric Clapton cover), a movie called Tulsa (imdb entry, and the fact that the character in Chandler from Friends was sent to Tulsa for one season. Some of S. E. Hinton's novels which were made into movies were set in and around Tulsa, and at least one, The Outsiders was filmed there. Dsmdgold 18:50, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

OK, I propose the following semi-major mod: creating a new section called "Tulsa's Impact on the World". For discussion, I've shown it below. If there's no object to the mod, I'll pull it out of the talk area for the sake of brevity. --N35w101 21:46, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

OK. I've made my mod. Decided to call it Influence on Society and Culture.

Of all the famous people from Tulsa, I find it so amzing how most of them left Tulsa and Oklahoma and rarely come back , Will Rogers moved to California and stayed, Garth Brooks has a house in the Tulsa Area, but he mostly lives in California

Kathie Lee Gifford had briefly resided in Tulsa when she attended Oral Roberts university back in the 1970s. She never came back to live there, but she spoke about her fund memories of Tulsa, the people, the places and the strong sense of Christian values Gifford shared. She had a first husband and a stillborn, and here's the Wikipedia link on her biography as shown above. Country music stars tend to find Tulsa very appealing for a visit or a second home, then Garth Brooks and Reba MacEntire hasn't left Oklahoma in their hearts. There have been an array of oil tycoons such as Frank Phillips and W.W. Keeler, and the Kerr-McGee corporation was founded in Tulsa (as far I know of) by two Oklahomans. The number of famous people from Tulsa is among the highest of most U.S. major cities, or at times had purchased a vacation home. Tulsa does seem like a nice place to live, including the rich and famous whenever they can. --Mike D 26 07:56, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

America's Favorite Zoo?

Microsoft has recently named the Tulsa Zoo as "America's Favorite Zoo" in an Internet contest related to a new video game they've produced. An anonymous editor added the appellation without any attribution. I have removed this reference, because it's a marketing contest, a non-scientific Internet poll, and "America's Favorite Zoo" doesn't mean anything. Thoughts? Danlovejoy 02:46, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

I'm not arguing for or against, but I offer these for consideration --N35w101 13:31, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

* the appellation is noted on the Tulsa Zoo's own website (albeit with a trademark identifier).

* the contest did result in a cash grant for zoo upkeep and improvement

* the contest gave the city additional national exposure.

* the contest generated positive interest in the zoo by local citizens (unlike another recent incident)

* the city has at least one other meaningless phrase associated with it: "Oil Capitol of the World"

Surely you mean Capital? But seriously, why not let the zoo bear the title? It's rather impressive (and shocked all of us, I can assure you) Sir Elderberry 23:12, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

---

history

Tulsa's page is getting really long. Lets move most or all of the history stuff to the article actually of Tulsa's history. If no one has objections, I'll make this change in a few days. Gatherton 07:36, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. For those who want to read on Tulsa's history, check the main article link History of Tulsa, Oklahoma. The article carries a sample that does not take up the page, nor the length is a problem. Historians in Oklahoma have debated whether or not Tulsa began as the state's main city or the title goes to Oklahoma City. The first capital of the then territory was Guthrie, 30 miles north of OK City, but has not registered as a major city to this day. Tulsa is the state's 2nd largest city in population, but Oklahoma is one of those states with two big cities that could be rivals. --Mike D 26 08:32, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Tulsa Race Riot

I've lived near Tulsa all my life, and the one thing always covered in History classes is the famous Tulsa Race Riot. It was one of the bloodiest riots in history but I'm surprised to see that this article has no hint of it. Someone should put in an article that at least covers the basics of it. I know there is a seperate article on wiki about this but at least a link would be good. Also, the demographics of the city are very much needed as east, west and north sections of tulsa are most commonly referred to have a dominate race. DrkBlueXG 10:22, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

There's been a link ever since as far back as I cared to look in the article history, which was October 2005. It's in the History of Tulsa section. Tex 00:25, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Tulsa Companies

The list Tulsa businesses headquartered or having a large presence is way too fluffy,

Rib Crib? come on, they only exists in the Tulsa area,

Mazzio's, again only in the Tulsa area with a few in Missouri and Arkansas

Cingular, a large presence? They have a large presence in every city

If resorting to putting Mazzio's on the list of Tulsa companies headquartered in Tulsa, It really show what bad shape Tulsa is in. Every small business owned in Tulsa IS headquartered in Tulsa, that does not make it worthy of putting on the list.

Most of the Article is a vain attempt to sell Tulsa as something it is not anyways.

It should be streamlined into this:

Companies headquartered in Tulsa

1.Williams Co.(probably will move to Houston, in the next 10 years)

2.Thrifty Car Rental (pretty big in their own regards, but not a huge company)

3.Quiktrip (regional, a few in Dallas and some in Atlanta)

Companies with a large presence

1. American Airlines (the largest of 3 maintainence facilities)

If Williams leaves and AA goes out of business, Tulsa is in trouble

Leave Tulsa Alone

Ok, people: Mazzio's has a presence in a dozen states and has hundreds of restaurants from Chicago to Atlanta, so it definitely qualifies as a regional business and listing it as headquartered in Tulsa certainly does not "show what a bad shape Tulsa is in". Let’s keep Wikipedia accurate and fair here, ok? First of all, its unfair to say that Williams and AA are the only companies with large presences in Tulsa. What do you consider to be a "large employer"? According to the Tulsa Metro Chamber, Tulsa has almost 40 companies with over 1,000 jobs in Tulsa, and as near as I can tell, the companies that are listed in the article are most of those same companies. Secondly, and while this isn't relevant to the discussion, it is relevant to these who say "Tulsa is in trouble": The vast majority of businesses in Tulsa are small businesses, yes; this is a major plus for the economy, not a low point. In fact, Entrepreneur.com rates Tulsa as the 10th best city mid-sized city in the U.S. for small businesses. Small businesses provide a very stable economic foundation and eliminate the uncertainty of huge swings in unemployment, making it almost completely certain that Tulsa can survive large employers leaving the city. That's just a point for those of you who think Tulsa is in trouble. (Not that AA or Williams will leave; Williams, for example, has been logging its best numbers for years now, and has recently shot its profits through the roof [in lamest terms] according to several Tulsa World articles in April of '06).

Everytime the national ecomony takes a dip Tulsa and other Southern and Midwestern cities get hit twice as hard because there economies are half as strong as the East-West, Gulf Coast cities. Plus I dont see small business thriving here in Tulsa, not like other large cities. All the locally owned gas stations are being put out by Quiktrip and there are more Walmarts per capita here in Tulsa than any other city. Most of the cities real estate is devalued and not worth much.It is wiser to sell and leave than buy here. The only reason to move here is- its cheap, but so is a greasy digusting 99 cent cheeseburger from Macdonalds.

Also the crime rate is very high, which hard to believe with the large amount of tax revenue that goes into law enforcement. People seem to be getting their kicks with violent crime, in my opinion the reason is they are so bored and fed up with living in such a backward boring place. Most people here are narrow minded and the city is not an acceptable place for young professionals and bright minds.We have a high crime and we are in the bible belt? This part of the country will never get it right. Take my advice if you are considering a move here, stay out of the midwest, you will be bored because there is nothing to do but watch TV and gain weight, you wont do things outdoors because it is either cold and windy or hot and humid.You wont be able to walk here or there because most places have no sidewalk,you have to drive there, and all the bars and clubs are spread out which leads to a crime-DUI, the city is horrible, half vacated, and about half the population is 65 and over.

http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=2656

Plus I lived in Chicago and I never recall a Mazzios until I came to Tulsa, so I would'nt say a large presence.

-Hey it's a free country - go ahead and move if you don't like Tulsa so much. I tend to agree with Southern Living Magazine and mostlivable.org, which rate Tulsa as one of the top 10 most attractive large cities in the country, and one of the top 10 best places to live. :)

http://www.mostlivable.org/cities/tulsa/home.html

The only reason the population is growing is the cheap unskilled workers coming from south of the border. I will probably move somewhere in the next few years, like I said before, there is a reason why people say "Tulsa sucks", you never hear people say "Maui sucks". I think that instead of saying "If you dont like Tulsa-leave" problem, I would rather hear "If you dont like Tulsa-Change it!"

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2004-04-11-most-livable_x.htm

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4182/is_20060105/ai_n15995862

http://www.ciremagazine.com/20040807.htm

28% office vacancy rate

http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:GsMu0Z2sWpQJ:www.tulsachamber.com/new/general.asp%3Fid%3D221+tulsa+office+space+vacancy+high&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=17

http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:SYxFcanxLSgJ:localmarketmonitor.com/Sample/Tulsa.pdf+tulsa+weak+economy&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=21

Im not saying Tulsa is the worst city to live in the USA, but it is damn close

I have to agree Tulsa sucks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.207.222.130 (talk • contribs) 5:28, 9 May 2006

Tulsa Rocks!

I have come to Tulsa to establish two new businesses, which I've added to the list. It's not wrong to do, because Tulsa is a unique market that is strong enough to attract new businesses, and this fact needs to be pointed out. wbsorens, May 19, 2006, 7:55 p.m.

Good luck to your business in Tulsa, I am positive that you are not from a coastal state, Because the only people who think that Tulsa is strong enough to attract new businesses is people from the small towns in Oklahoma and surrounding states, go see other parts of the country and you will be amazed at the lackluster of Tulsa.

Government

How come no mention of the city government? evrik 16:37, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

By golly, you're right. I've taken steps to correct that. #1, I created a small section in the main article. #2, following the example of New York City's article, I created a Government of Tulsa, Oklahoma page. (Didn't want to futher bloat the main article). --N35w101 05:34, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Removed "Center of the Universe" section

This section, which appears to be merely Original Research was removed, until a source can be found for the claims:

Another unique local downtown landmark is the "Center of the Universe", an echo spot located on the arched pedestrian bridge, next to the old Tulsa Union Depot (the future home of the Oklahoma Jazz Hall of Fame). To experience the acoustic phenomenon of the Center of the Universe, all one needs to do is to stand in the middle of the circle on the arch of the bridge and speak. This part of downtown is always fairly empty of people, especially at night, and is a good place for urban exploration. At the bottom of the steps, next to the train tracks, is a sewer grate which, as legend has it, leads eventually to Tulsa's defunct system of underground tunnels, which supposedly stretch throughout downtown.

--Leflyman^Talk 18:55, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree with removing it. I live in Tulsa and I know that the "center of the universe" really is a true local legend... but I don't think it needs to be in an encyclopedia article about Tulsa.

The section on the port of Catoosa states that it is the most inland port in the world, this is false,the its the most inland in the USA.

Long article

Standard disclaimer: native Tulsan, newbie Wikipedian, etc etc. That out of the way, does this article really need some of the sections it has? I don't see why a listing of every branch of TCCL is necessary. Nor do I see the need for a description of how the road system works or an enumeration of churches in the area. These problems were highlighted back in December but I'd like to emphasize the statement: this is an encyclopedia article about Tulsa, not the Chamber of Commerce Guide to Tulsa. This article reads like it was written by a marketing committee and the extensive external linkage smells to me of SEO firms capitalizing on Wikipedia's high visibility and reputation.

Suggestions:

• Condense the section on the neighborhoods. Some of it's good, some of it's pointless name-dropping, and I've never heard anyone refer to Terwilleger Heights in my life.
• Condense the Healthcare System section. In the first place, it's hardly encyclopedic, and in the second place, it's absurdly biased toward St. Francis. The section is filled with meaningless accolades of St. Francis and misses entirely mention of Hillcrest and TRMC. Not to mention, despite the fact that everyone in town calls it St. John's, the proper name of the hospital is St. John Medical Center -- please see [2].
• Business and economy. Is there any reason that can't become, say, List of major employers in Tulsa, Oklahoma, or at least just feature the top 10 in each category? As it stands it's nothing but a long list of redlinks, which says that these companies are not important or notable enough to merit creation of even a stubpage for them.
• Excise mention of the street network. Totally NN.
• The list of schools needs trimmed. I think mentioning the public school systems and maybe the first five private schools is enough. The list of parochial schools is mostly redlinks and school inclusionists notwithstanding, they're really NN.
• The section about TCCL needs removed. Completely. There is no reason for this information to be here, other than useless padding of an overlong article. The map of library facilities on the TCCL website does an excellent job of helping people to locate their nearest library.
• The Faith and Worship section needs to go. I realize that Tulsa is a deeply religious town with more than its share of churches -- after all, Oral Roberts built there, didn't he? But merely being "popular" doesn't make a church notable and there are some churches included that I'd quibble with the popular designation anyway. The megachurches like Rhema, Victory Christian and Higher Dimensions might be worth a mention, and Boston Avenue because it is a noted work of Art Deco. Everything else should be removed.

Look, I get being proud of the city, but that pride has spilled over the line here into a meaningless puff piece. This article has been bothering me for months but I've hit the point where my frustration at this useless article is boiling over. I figured I'd throw my concerns on the talk page before I grabbed a pair of shears and started pruning. (janeway216 17:39, 5 May 2006 (UTC))

• Be Bold and go for it. I agree with your suggestions above. There's a lot of puffery and peacock language here which doesn't come off particularly encyclopedic. —Leflyman^Talk 18:09, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I intend to go for it, I just wanted to throw up a notice on the talk page in case this bothered anyone and also so people had warning of what was going to happen. I didn't figure this was that controversial, but everyone's seen the edit wars and arguments elsewhere -- so, propose, then implement. (janeway216 21:31, 5 May 2006 (UTC))

Corporations in Tulsa

There are a few instances in this discussion where there is very similar word usage, all of which talking about "how bad Tulsa is"... I am ?beginning to think it is the same person, and all I ask is to stop polluting the Tulsa discussion board. I thought discussions were meant to help wiki editors discuss how to edit pages, not to throw far-flung opinions about the topic in question. So stop it, seriously. I don't care if you don't like Tulsa, but who ever you are, you're not helping anyone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.255.195.70 (talk • contribs) 21:05, 4 May 2006

To whom it concerns,

This is a discussion board to discuss Tulsa, I would not consider my opinions to be far flung , to consider Mazzios and other companies to be MAJOR companies that are based in Tulsa ,THAT IS FAR FLUNG!!!! This is a discussion board, if you want to paint a rosy picture of Tulsa and decieve people, this is wrong. I am just helping people to save their time and money on a plane ticket and go somewhere else if they want to enjoy life. If you are into facts you should tell the truth-the economy sucks,the city is one of the most bigoted in the nation, real estate is cheap because no one wants to buy it, etc, etc, stop with the picture of Tulsa through rose colored glasses of Tulsa, come on Sobo? South Boston? give me a freakin break, no one calls south Boston "Sobo" "Uptown Tulsa"? bullcrap, This article is so bogus and rose colored. It needs to be downsized, without all the references to all the little details like a list of churchs, or all the Tulsa library branches, companies with a large presence, Cingular? Cox cable? Direct TV? they have a large presence in all cities. Stop with the fluffy hype, it is deceptive.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.207.222.130 (talk • contribs) 14:52, 5 May 2006

..again, Mazzios has hundreds of locations in over a dozen states. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.244.174.143 (talk • contribs) 17:28, 6 May 2006

I am not the only one writing negative comments about Tulsa, its not just one person, and if Mazzios is considered to be a MAJOR company to Tulsa, you just confirmed how bad the economy really is in Tulsa.Mazzios has most locations within Oklahoma, with a handful out of state.Your comment above is misleading—Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.207.222.130 (talk • contribs) 11:36, 8 May 2006

• The anonymous poster above apparently hasn't checked the Mazzios.com Web site, which lists 11 states, and hundreds of locations. Mazzios also owns the "Zios" corporate chain of Italian restaurants with 17 locations in 6 states. A recent corporate news release notes, "Mazzio's Corporation employs over 4,000 people." That's not a minor company. Note to the both IPs above: this is not a "discussion board to discuss Tulsa"; it's a work-space for discussing improvements/changes to the article. Do not use it for uncivil comments. And please sign your posts. —Leflyman^Talk 18:03, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

As I said before most are in Oklahoma actually 102, 30 in Arkansas,,12 in Missouri,16 in Texas,2 in Kansas,1 in Iowa,1 in Illinois,1 in Tennessee, 9 in Mississippi, 2 in Georgia, they are in 10 states, and dont have hundreds of stores, and they are not major, they are regional at best with most stores in Oklahoma, they have 1 store in three states, and 2 in two states, you are trying to be misleading, they are not a MAJOR company. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.245.163.1 (talk • contribs) 16:53, 8 May 2006

• The anonymous IP again makes a weak claim. The Oklahoma Department of Commerce would differ with him: Mazzios is listed as one of the "Major Oklahoma Employers, with an estimated 2400-2500 employees in 2005. (See: OKCommerce.gov PDF) It is behind Braums (whose entire milk and store operations comprise 3600 people) and Yum Brands (3000-3500 people, which includes KFC, Pizza Hut, Long Johns).—Leflyman^Talk 01:48, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

And what about Ribcrib? The are a MAJOR company? LOL!!

• Bama Pie? There products are only found regionally
• BC and BS of Oklahoma? Never heard of them, and they sound as if they only serve Oklahoma, not major
• Casillas Energy? Never heard of them
• Excel Energy? Never heard of them
• Flintco? Regional
• Gallagher Bryce Insurance? Never heard of them
• Helmerich and Payne? Never heard of them
• John Zink Co? They are regional
• Lowerance Electronics? Small electronic manufacturing company
• Manhattan Construction Company? They only build in the Tulsa Area
• Matrix services? Never heard of them
• McElroy Manufacturing? Never heard of them
• North American Galvinizing and Coatings? Never heard of them
• Public Service of Oklahoma? They serve only Oklahoma
• Syntroelum? I think they are out of business
• Unit Corp? Never heard of them
• Webco? Never heard of them
• Vanguard? Never heard of them

• I'm still confused as to why a company can only be considered major if you've heard of them. I'm sure there are plenty of major companies nationwide that you haven't heard of and that does not take away from that company's importance.--Nmajdan 19:48, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Ive been in Tulsa for a while and these are not MAJOR COMPANIES,most I have never heard of and the others small manufacturing type companies —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.245.163.1 (talk • contribs) 16:53, 8 May 2006

• I would highly suggest this anonymous poster to stop injecting his uninformed personal opinion into an encyclopedic article. For example, Rib Crib started at 16th & Harvard in 1992, now has 40 locations in seven states-- according to one source [3] they have over 1600 employees system-wide and revenues of $47million-- which certainly qualify as a major Tulsa enterprise. Likewise, a simple search of the Internet reveals that the Bama Pie Companies have over 1000 employees, revenues of $200 million and have products sold in major retail/food stores worldwide. Hint: 13,000 McDonalds sell Bama apple pies. Bama received the 2004 "Malcom Baldridge Quality Award" from the U.S. Department of Commerce's National Institute of Standards and Technology [4] (Apparently the first Oklahoma company to get the award.) It is a major company. The other claims above are likewise un-researched opinion.—Leflyman^Talk 01:48, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Again, if these are considered MAJOR companies for Tulsa, I see why Tulsa gets hit twice as hard as the national economy when it takes a dip.And the discussion board is for discussion, If you dont like my opinion, maybe you are not ready for discussion. On a NATIONAL LEVEL Tulsa has only a handful of Major companies, Williams, Quiktrip and Thifty Car Rental. Most of these companies might be considered "MAJOR" by Oklahoma standards,but so is a gas station in a town of 100 people. What you considered a MAJOR company is relative to Tulsa and Oklahoma and not what is considered a MAJOR company nationally or internationally. If you believe Mazzios is a major company ask people outside of Oklahoma,SW Missouri, Western Arkansas, what a Mazzios is, no one would know.And if you take a look at the Oklahoma City site they list Braums as a "smaller" company based in Oklahoma City, and Mazzios is smaller than Braums.

• And AGAIN: Wikipedia is not a "discussion board" nor is it a soapbox for your opinion. Your continued grandstanding here is unproductive. You have now been warned for incivility. If you continue posting comments like "Tulsa sucks" (as above) you may be blocked from further editing on Wikipedia. Also, please sign your comments.—Leflyman^Talk 03:44, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Someone else agrees with me- Business and economy. Is there any reason that can't become, say, List of major employers in Tulsa, Oklahoma, or at least just feature the top 10 in each category? As it stands it's nothing but a long list of redlinks, which says that these companies are not important or notable enough to merit creation of even a stubpage for them.

Why dont you revert the article when you agree it should be changed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.207.222.130 (talk • contribs) 11:56, 9 May 2006

Dont accuse me saying Tulsa Sucks, somebody else said it, I would'nt disagree with him either, he seems to be correct in his opinion! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.207.222.130 (talk • contribs) 13:28, 10 May 2006

• Apparently you are unfamiliar with the history feature of Wikipedia, which shows that your IP address (198.207.222.130) added "I have to agree Tulsa sucks" at 15:28, 9 May 2006. Anything else you wish to claim? --Leflyman^Talk 19:40, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Yea I do, I claim that if Mazzios is a MAJOR company for Tulsa, It only proves that Tulsa does'nt have much going for itself. OK I did say Tulsa sucks, I admit it, I think many people agree to. Tulsa is backwards, potholed, bigoted, depressing, boring and not very pleasant. Have you ever known people to come to Tulsa for vacation? Hell no!They go to nice pleasant places.This article on Tulsa is misleading, and sounds like a tourist brochure.Why dont you change the article instead? I might have said Tulsa sucks, but Im not the only one posting negative comments about Tulsa on the discussion board. I wont say Tulsa Sucks anymore OK?Im sorry

Back to the dicussion , These are not MAJOR COMPANIES

Ribcrib? They are a MAJOR company? LOL!!

• Bama Pie? There products are only found regionally
• BC and BS of Oklahoma? Never heard of them, and they sound as if they only serve Oklahoma, not major
• Casillas Energy? Never heard of them
• Excel Energy? Never heard of them
• Flintco? Regional
• Gallagher Bryce Insurance? Never heard of them
• Helmerich and Payne? Never heard of them
• John Zink Co? They are regional
• Lowerance Electronics? Small electronic manufacturing company
• Manhattan Construction Company? They only build in the Tulsa Area
• Matrix services? Never heard of them
• McElroy Manufacturing? Never heard of them
• North American Galvinizing and Coatings? Never heard of them
• Public Service of Oklahoma? They serve only Oklahoma
• Syntroelum? I think they are out of business
• Unit Corp? Never heard of them
• Webco? Never heard of them
• Vanguard? Never heard of them

Ive been in Tulsa for a while and these are not MAJOR COMPANIES,most I have never heard of and the others small manufacturing type companies.WHO ARE MOST OF THESE COMPANIES? THEY ARE COMPANIES WITH A REGIONAL PRESENCE PERHAPS, BUT A MAJOR NATIONAL OR INTERNATIONAL THEY ARE NOT.

What about the library system in the article, you think that every branch of the TULSA LIBRARY SYSTEM needs to be in the article? Or every award a hospital recieved? UPTOWN neighborhood? Ive never heard of UPTOWN Tulsa,the CLIMATE portion makes Tulsas' weather seem very pleasent, the truth is SUMMERS ARE BRUTALLY HOT, WINTERS ARE COLD AND WINDY, AND SPRING AND FALL ARE SHORT LIVED.this article is full of FLUFFINESS to fill a void that Tulsa lacks-very few real points of interest.And Local labels like Green Country should be excluded because no one knows what Green Country is outside of NW Oklahoma. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.207.222.130 (talk • contribs) 12:53, 10 May 2006

I think it's really funny you're complaining about every branch of TCCL being listed, considering that you're posting from there. Well, at least when you're not posting from TJC (at IP address 199.245.163.1). And, you know, we know exactly what times of the day you're posting based on the logs. Oh, and there are 2-3 other IPs I've linked you to as well. Anonymity? Not.

Isn't there a setting where we can lock this (and the main page) to be registered users only? And why hasn't anyone suggested shunting some parts of this article into sub-articles? --D Wilbanks 02:25, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

So what if you know what time of the day I am posting at. Why do you care about that? the article is about Tulsa. And I am not the only person writing negative comments about Tulsa, so go investigate other people. Why are you investigating me? Did I break some law? I said Tulsa sucks, you are investigating me for that? I wouldnt worry about me, I would worry about the condition of Tulsas corporate presence, Citgo Petroleum moved to Houston, Sunoco Petroleum Moved to Houston, Vintage Petroleum moved to Houston, Occidental Petroleum vacated 24000 jobs in Tulsa in the 1990's, Phillips Petroleum moved to Houston, Wiltel got bought out, but who has filled the place of these MAJOR companies? MAZZIOS, WHICH IS A REGIONAL PIZZA JOINT? and RIBCRIB, A REGIONAL BBQ RESTAURANT? If the rose color tint hasnt wore of your glasses yet, I guess my arguments are futile. Maybe they left Tulsa because Tulsa is Lame and Plain, They dont call it the "Great Plains" for nothing!—Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.207.222.130 (talk • contribs)

But you're not editing the file. You're not contributing. You're just bitching. This is an encyclopedia, not a Tulsa Sucks forum. Can you define "major company?" How many employees? What's the minimum annual revenue? And you work under this assumption that all the people editing this file are these Chamber of Commerce lackeys. I don't live in Tulsa. I got out when I graduated from high school and never looked back. I live 2000 miles away in a better city. But I'm helping to edit this document. You're not. You're just a sad, sad person who can only talk about how "lame" Tulsa is.

Let me say it again: I don't live in Tulsa. You do. So, who is the lame one in this conversation?

In the words of my father, "Piss or get off the pot." Contribute. Change the page and don't editorialize when you do it. Or get out, troll. --D Wilbanks 19:59, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I have contributed to the article, I shortened it a bit, but it keeps getting reverted. I find amazing that the Tulsa is a little bit longer than the NEW YORK CITY, DALLAS, HOUSTON, articles. I dont think that is warranted.

First off, please sign sign your messages with the four tildes (~~~~) so we know who you are and can recognize your posts. About your message, while I do agree the article is a little long, some of those larger cities have a lot of "see also" and "main article" links whereas the Tulsa article has all the information in the main article; this is perhaps why it is a little longer. Any contributions you make are appreciated.--Nmajdan 01:51, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Please don't feed the trolls. --D Wilbanks 03:05, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Whats wrong, I hit a nerve? Tell me, do you only you agree the truth as long as it doesnt violate your view of Tulsa?

You still didn't sign your name. I want to see your edits so I can determine for myself why they were reverted. And you only chose to comment on insulting comment and not the constructive one. You should've answered the constructive comment and ignored the other.--Nmajdan 16:08, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

The New York city link has less links than Tulsa, it is still shorter than Tulsa too, hard too believe

I am sorry, I have to laugh at this entire conversation. Maybe this will help:

Manhattan Construction Company - Currently building: -Dallas Cowboys Stadium and the Ritz Carlton towers in Dallas. -The "World of Coca-Cola" in Atlanta. -The US Capital Business Center in Washington D.C. -A variety of othe projects both nationally and internationally.

Unit Corporation was just named #4 on Forbes list of the best mid-cap stocks.

Helmerich & Payne had 1st quarter 06 revenues of nearly $300mm. They are on track for 1+ billion in 2006 revenues.

Vanguard owns Alamo and National.

Lowrance Electronics makes Sonar and GPS systems that are sold all over the world.

Okay, you get the picture. Like the previous comment said, just because you haven't heard of them doesn't mean they're not a major company.

Oh well, these companies left recently

• Occidental Pertoleum,
• Phillips Petroleum,
• Citgo Petroleum,
• Sunoco Research Center,
• Amoco Research Center,
• Kerr Mcgee is leavin OKC
• William's is mainly based in Houston at the Williams Tower, they will probably leave in a few years too.
• THIS LIST IS GROWING!!!

Mazzio's takes there place as a major company, HOORAY FOr TULSA!!!! who needs those oil companies we have MAZZIO"S as a MAJOR company!!!

Tulsa article too long?

I've personally visited Tulsa twice to visit my maternal family side and how Tulsans boost a strong sense of civic pride. For one thing, I don't feel the Wikipedia article is horribly long, it's been frequently added to a point some people can't stand reading it. I appreciate changes in the article like the link to Tulsa's churches, about 220 of them, as the city has a cultural characteristic of the bible belt. 55 are "mega-churches" with over 1,000 members, and they span many acres with recreational amentities and private schools for members' children. I'm from Southern Cal. and noticed there's a deep sense of religious feeling, esp. the Protestant Christian (evangelical) kind in the community. Tulsa ranks one of the most Republican counties in the state, if not the country, despite the number of Democrats in Tulsa is above the state average. There is a strong patriotic flavor in Tulsans of all races, faithes and backgrounds, including the local American Indians in the area's 6 recognized tribes. Keep on the additions and careful edits on Tulsa until it's an explanatory and informative article. --Mike D 26 08:03, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Tulsas Roads

With more toll roads than any other state in the union, It is hard to believe that even with the revenue from toll roads, Tulsa and the State of Oklahoma have the worst roads in the nation.

• As a lifelong Tulsa resident, this is a constant source of bewilderment to me as well.--Nmajdan 19:45, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

It may have something to do with not complying with Federal transportation mandates. See categorical grant --68.97.2.180 00:48, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Major league soccer

Somebody added to the article that a major league soccer team is coming to Tulsa. Is there a source for this?--Nmajdan 17:51, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

News to me. I can find no cite for this on Google News or on the MLS website. Last I heard they were adding teams in Toronto and the Philadelphia area but weren't considering Tulsa or OKC at this time. --D Wilbanks 22:44, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok, then I'm going to remove it. If somebody has a source, they can readd it.--Nmajdan 23:23, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

List of churches, libraries is gone

I'm taking the advice that is so often given. I'm being bold. List of churches- gone. List of libraries-gone. I've never seen anything like either of those in an encyclopedia, and they're unnecessary, so I took them out. Jedck 03:50, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

WHAT??? What have you done??? Seriously though, if somebody really wants that list, it needs to be on its own page. Like List of churches in Tulsa, Oklahoma or something.--Nmajdan 14:34, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Yah this list isn't really bad (seriously, I've needed a list of churches before). List of churches in Tulsa should be a good place for them. Other similar lists: List of churches in the United Church of Canada, List of churches in London, and List of churches in Fort Wayne, Indiana. Clearly most aren't going to be notable enough for their own articles, but some are (like Holy Family Cathedral, etc.). -- Ash Lux ^{(talk | contribs)} 03:39, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Look at http://www.churchangel.com/WEBOK/tulsa.htm for a starter list of Churches in Tulsa. And here's a list for Broken Arrow http://www.churchangel.com/WEBOK/brokenarrow.htm. If we do a list of churches, we might want to go ahead and have a seperate list for each city. -- Ash Lux ^{(talk | contribs)} 03:41, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

I've started a list of churches on my page and am working to expand it using the list Ash Lux provided. I will start the article when I get a little further along. Here's the link: User:Nmajdan/List of Churches in Tulsa, Oklahoma.--Nmajdan 13:36, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Man, there are a lot of Baptist churches. I've gone about halfway through the website so I'm going to go ahead and create the article and I'll continue to expand it over time. I will be placing it here: List of churches in Tulsa, Oklahoma.--Nmajdan 14:07, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

I would recommend that your well formatted "List of churches in Tulsa" be Moved to a "List of places of worship in tulsa" or something like that. That way you could include synagogues and mosques.--Paul E. Ester 02:53, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Please remember that Wikipedia is not a directory or repository of links. Having said that, inclusion of Tam Bao Buddhist Temple and the Hindu Temple of Tulsa would seem to be appropriate.--Leflyman^Talk 01:23, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

I read your post as saying we should not have this list at all. So should it be deleted or not?--Nmajdan 03:48, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Opinions about tulsa

http://www.utulsa.edu/collegian/article.asp?article=1832 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.187.154.33 (talk • contribs)

Can we start the RFC process on this user? I'm really tired of this endless stream of "Tulsa sucks" material. Tulsa may well suck, but it's not NPOV, and this user has not contributed to this article in any substantive way. I think it's bordering on trolling. --D Wilbanks 02:26, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Ha. Sure, I'll support.--NMajdan•talk 18:18, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I didnt say Tulsa sucks, I said this is what people think about Tulsa! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.187.154.33 (talk • contribs)

Tulsa is what's typical of Middle American communities, but it's a major city and has most of the same amentities like New York, Chicago or Los Angeles. Tulsa isn't terribly boring at all, but some things to make a major city are missing. I don't know this need for haute culture, but Tulsa has ballets and symphonies, elegant shopping in Downtown, and college education in OSU and Univ. of OK. right in Tulsa. Frank Gilcrease Museum is a special arts and cultural museum devoted to the American West, but includes rare and highly-acclaimed paintings one may see in Paris, Manhattan, L.A. or London. Sherwin Miller Museum of Jewish Art is one of its' kind to exhibit artistry of the Jewish people, some of them live in Tulsa. Is there a snobbery exposed by recent edits in the Tulsa Wikipedia article? Anyways, North Tulsa has enjoyed a relative real estate boom, despite the locals consider it a mostly low-income Black area and the presence of Indian reservations (the Osage) is actually an affluent residential section. Tulsa has been in negative publicity for many years as a hub of racist, ultra-conservative and fundamentalist activity. But not every resident is like that, not to mention there has been immigration of Asians, Latinos and Middle East nationalities into Tulsa in recent years. I guess for a mainly conservative city, Tulsa isn't "closed off" to various ethnic, racial and social groups like perceived in the media. The Greenwood race riot of 1921 is in the past, but Tulsans learned their lesson and moved on to where the city stands on race relations today. The city's historic Black community once was the most well-off in the early 1900's or you won't find the nickname "Black Wall Street" to indicate a fiscal boom had took place in Tulsa. Another thing to add is in 1926, a professional football team the Hominy Indians of Tulsa was made up entirely of American Indians and played in the predecessor of the NFL...but the Indians lost to the New York Giants in a championship match. --Mike D 26 08:13, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Religion Section

I think there should be a section on Religion in Tulsa. Something covering the highlights like ORU/REMA etc. I don't have enough of the background but it seems to me there could be a NPOV narrative mentioning the highlights. Just looking at it as a economic perspective there is a lot to cover.--Paul E. Ester 02:53, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Street Networks

Needs to be removed, who needs a whole section on how the streets are situatated, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.187.154.33 (talk • contribs)

I think this section needs to be brought back. It is a good, informative sectionon the structure of the city. We'll get more input before it is brought back.--Nmajdan 20:58, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Some the external links should be removed too, The tulsa talk message board links to a site that hasnt been used in a year and hardly at that—Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.187.154.33 (talk • contribs)

also the section on Tulsa districts and neighborhoods needs to be condensed—Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.187.154.33 (talk • contribs)

• On an unrelated note, I have an issue with somebody with such a negative perception regarding an article having such a heavy hand in the editing of that article. Why do you continue to change this article when your views on it are so wantonly negative?--Nmajdan 20:58, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

It's clear he doesn't want to participate other than to add his opinion. We should either ignore him or start a process to take action against him.

I restored a shortened version of the street system section to the article. The street system is unique in its orderliness and its use of cities east/west of the Mississippi for N-S running streets. I think it's noteworthy. --D Wilbanks 05:06, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I think the problem with this article is some people are too positive about Tulsa, and are trying to portray Tulsa using deception. In addition it is obvious I am not alone in my opinions of Tulsa.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.187.154.33 (talk • contribs)

So thats why you removed a section about the street network? Because its too positive about Tulsa?--Nmajdan 21:06, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

No I removed it because it is worthless information, so what if avenues run north-south and streets run east-west in Tulsa,every road in the world goes in a certain direction. I guess you would like to include which way toilet bowls in Tulsa spin -counter clockwise or clockwise?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.187.154.33 (talk • contribs)

Nevertheless, when you have several people involved in the editing of an article, you need to discuss it here and get peoples' opinions before taking action.--Nmajdan 03:36, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Tulsa was one of the first endenavours of master planning when it came to create a new city in the 1890s land boom. The deleted section on streets was either redundant or not interesting enough, because most Midwestern cities have the N-S/E-W straight street networks. Tulsa has an interstate system to serve a major city, but too typical for Wikipedia. You can see the freeways and the Tulsa Turnpike on the map enclosed in the article. B.t.w. Tulsa is in the Northern hemisphere, so those bowls spin counter-clockwise. What a warped kind of sense of humor. You need to ask Australians on that one. --Mike D 26 08:17, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Districts & Neighborhoods

In an effort to shorten the article, I think we should remove some of the less significant districts and neighborhoods. I want to discuss it here before taking action. Some ones I think can go are: Southern Hills, Kendall-Whittier, Terwilleger Heights, and Maple Ridge/Sunset Terrace. And actually, the last ttwo could probably be combined into one. According to the article, Sunset Terrace is bordered by Terwilleger on the east side, and Maple Ridge on the south side. Nevertheless, that part needs to be shrunk down and the ones with only 2-3 sentence descriptions should be the first to go.--Nmajdan 21:03, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree on Southern Hills and Terwilleger. I don't agree on Kendall-Whitter -- it was a significant neighborhood that has been gentrified. Sunset Terrace needs to be folded into Maple Ridge, the more significant "named" neighborhood. If you told me I could only keep one neighborhood of the four to highlight, I'd choose Maple Ridge. It has a number of historic oil mansions, as does Swan Lake.

I do wonder why we need so many neighborhoods listed. In my mind I'd only highlight Maple Ridge, Swan Lake, Brookside, Midtown (as a single piece and not broken down), Kendall-Whittier, Osage Hills, North Tulsa, West Tulsa (including Redfork), East Tulsa, and South Tulsa. That's ten areas, of which five are true neighborhoods. --D Wilbanks 23:42, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

It would be worth looking at what other cities have done. See Category:Neighborhoods of the United States. Generally each neighborhood would become it's own article. With a link back to either a "list of neighborhoods article" or a table itself. I would recommend someone look at some other cities see how they have tackled it and then be wp:bold.

The naming convention for neighborhood articles is usually "neighborhood name, city name". Does "South Tulsa, Tulsa" sound correct?

Finally often realtors often maintain city directories organized by what are the official neighborhood names and boundaries recognized by their business. Something like that should be the reference for neighborhood names should be.--Paul E. Ester 00:52, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

I think our neighborhoods are significant and distinctive to Tulsa, these are the details that make Tulsa unique and I would hate to lose the content. I think Richmond, Virginia's content creators did a great job and would support a similar effort. --Talion Nelson 22:24, 16 June 2006

Hi Talion, were you referencing this approach? Neighborhoods_of_Richmond,_Virginia? Anyone hate it--Paul E. Ester 16:46, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I like that a lot, mainly because the neighborhoods are in their own article. But I do think it'd be a fairer approach. --D Wilbanks 00:10, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, you are correct; I mistakenly left out the link. ----Talion Nelson 22:39, 18 June 2006

Ok, I created this in my userspace. I haven't added any content yet (which will more than likely simple include a copy/paste of the current material) so its just an outline of the neighborhoods. Did I leave anything out? I'll try to write a couple paragraphs on the main page in place of the current content and then everybody else is free to change it.--NMajdan•talk 14:59, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Hey there Nmajdan ... still planning to work up the Neighborhoods of Tulsa article? --N35w101 04:00, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Ha. Actually, I completely forgot about this. Yes, I still would like to but feel free to step in if you wish. I got caught up in the OU article and WikiProject College football. I'll see what I can do over the next couple of days.--NMajdan•talk 17:46, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I moved the current neighborhood information to its own page.--NMajdan•talk 17:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Sweet. Just that one edit makes the article so much more readable. Thanks. --N35w101 22:57, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Nice work, makes a big difference thanks.--Paul E. Ester 14:25, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Question: do you think the Cityscape section, which is basically only one sentence now, could move into Geography? It has a redundant point about overall area which is better stated in Geography, and the rest would make a nice jumping point to the related child article. Also, maybe the Geography text regarding parks, etc could then be transferred to the child article too? --N35w101 15:31, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

What about the Eastland section where a shopping mall stands in the city's eastern edge? I'm sure someone will discuss the East side, not just the North and South sides, as well the West bank of the Arkansas river. The Cityscape article is constantly changing and narrowed down to a point the information is missing and incomplete. Revert the edits please, but proof-read and cut the info. down, because the parks and recreation thing can provide a sense of "things to do" to the reader. Tulsa city limits extend beyond the county line to Osage, Wagoner and Creek counties, in case anyone knew about it outside of Tulsa. --Mike D 26 08:21, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Population

Can someone link the 2004 census with the population information, or the info should be removed. There is no way to know the accuracy of the last edit, it could be vandalism, without the facts it's impossible to know if it should be reverted...--Paul E. Ester 01:22, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Bartlesville is quite a distance from Tulsa. There are towns of more significance that are a lot closer to Tulsa. I lived in Tulsa for 40 years and never thought of Bartlesville as a part of the Tulsa metro area. Tulsa is the activity center of "Green Country", which is northeastern Oklahoma. Bartlesville is not as important to Tulsa as Sapulpa, Broken Arrow, Jenks, or Owasso. I really just don't understand the reference to Bartlesville?(Rossmccauley 03:38, 13 January 2007 (UTC))

I tend to agree. Be bold and make whatever changes you feel are necessary. This article needs it.--NMajdan•talk 03:45, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Geography and climate

I have made many updates to this section in an effort to improve readability, etc. My updates were:

• Streamlined repetitive text re temp & humidity spread between and among the sections
• standardized measurement presentations, as some listed SI units first while others listed "British" units first. Since the US is officially metric since 1866 (not a typo) [5] whether or not we use it in every day life, I put the SI units first.
• removed redundant latitude info in Climate and moved it all to geography. Ditto elevation
• removed kissing tradition @ Woodward Park -- not everyone's tradition and arguably not encyclopedic.
• removed relative distance from OKC info -- not needed or relevant given the lat/long information and mention of northeastern OK
• tried to make small, readable, paragraphs with related information

--N35w101 01:14, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Added a bit about ozone and it's affects to the Climate section. Wiki'ed appropriate links such as ozone, hydrocarbon, Clean Air Act, and E.P.A. If someone knows which Clean Air Act is most appropriate, a re-Wiki to that link, instead of the general article, would be great. --N35w101 15:24, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Lists need to be trimmed

Suggestions:

This article incorporates too many "lists of links", contrary to (What) Wikipedia is not:

[A] Mere collections of external links or Internet directories. There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant links to an article; however, excessive lists can dwarf articles and detract from the purpose of Wikipedia.

Further, articles are not:

Directories, directory entries, TV/Radio Guide or a resource for conducting business.

In short, removal of the extensive links to companies, places of worship, organisations and other external sites, not dealing specifically with the topic of Tulsa is necessary. If nothing more than a link can be said about an entry, then it probably isn't appropriate.

Further, please combine the multi-item sub-headings (and sub-sub-headings). The TOC is significantly too long. Not every subject deserves its own separate subheading.

(I started to edit this myself, but was called away) --Leflyman^Talk 16:27, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

• OK. Done. All sub-headings et al removed. I left all the content untouched (except Tulsa MSA) and replaced sub-headings with bold markups. My only objective was to reduce the TOC. Now the lists can be concentrated on. --N35w101 02:12, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism alert

Somebody left potentially offensive edits on Tulsa, since then was removed, as a city full of complete idiots and other stereotypes associated with Oklahoma. I copied it as soon I can: <vandalism refactored> Please note Wikipedia don't allow edits and statements that attack, defame, insult or offend any group of people, such as classist and regional slurs and it's a general stereotyping list of whites in the lower-income spectrum that do not make up the majority of people in Tulsa. --Mike D 26 08:26, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

• When was this made -- I see no indication of any such recent vandalism in the article history. Additionally, there's no need to copy and repost vandalism. Simply revert to the previous version will delete it. In cases of serious, repeated vandalism, a warning should be placed on the offending user's (usually an anon IP) pages. Vandals rarely check talk pages to see if anyone noticed.--Leflyman^Talk 15:10, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

• Looks like some anon IPs do follow the talk pages. 198.187.154.105 re-entered the vandalism comments, which I have subsequently removed again. Remember, talk pages are for discussions on improving the article itself, not for general discussions about the topic. See: What talk pages may be used for. --Leflyman^Talk 17:35, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

It wasnt me this time, Looks like I have a second opinion, and you guys thought only one person was behind all the negative comments... Also Im not a vandal, I just talk in the discussion page —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.187.154.105 (talk • contribs)

I apologize for discussing the topic, but the article is the topic and how vandalism is an ominous threat to the article. Alright, an anonymous vandal is switching IPs and managed to acquire our member names. Please keep our eyes out for the vandal and whenever vandals strike again, track them down and report their mess to the administration board. Stereotypes can create a problem, in terms of wikiquette and can create an edit war. I hate it when a certain article draws in a negative stereotype, also known as "web trolling" to incite others and what they can do is damage the article. --Mike D 26 05:10, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I am not vandalizing this,I copied the comment from a vandal who said that Tulsa is full hicks and is a scene from a Jerry Springer episode. Im sorry but the discussion is vandalism. To merely quote a vandal does not make someone a vandal.

The vandal also stated that Tulsa is full of Racists. Mind you, I did not say this, I am merely quoting the vandal.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.187.154.33 (talk • contribs)

Additional sources for citation

To bring this (and its associated History of Tulsa, Oklahoma) article in compliance with Wikipedia policy on verifiability. Here are some reliable sources which could be used for citation:

• "I said Tulsa, OK?" (Washington Post, April 2, 2006)
• Tulsa Preservation Commission - includes history of various phases
• ForwardLook.net - reprint of story from Plymouth 1946-1949 discussing the 1957 Plymouth "timecapsule" buried at the courthouse, to be unearthed next year. See also: http://www.buriedcar.com/

--Leflyman^Talk 15:56, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Archive

I archived some of the older discussions from this page as well as some of the discussions that lacked signatures.--NMajdan•talk 17:58, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Nickname?

Tulsa has many nicknames, so at least one should be included, but the nicknames don't show up after the edit to the city tab? If more than one nickname is not acceptable, we should try to decide which nickname is most viable. But at least one of Tulsa's nicknames should be included beside "motto" in the city tab. --Okiefromokla 23:03, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

It was because the attribute was "nicknames" and it must be the singular "nickname."--NMajdan•talk 23:23, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

What nickname? America's most beautiful city? This states the opposite, http://www.planetizen.com/node/15 http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06023/642641.stm The reference to Tulsa as "America's most beautiful city" needs to be removed, because for one it is not true, and two it is opinion.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.187.154.33 (talk • contribs)

Yes, unless we have an article citation calling Tulsa America's Most Beautiful City, it needs to be removed. Opinions are allowed on Wikipedia, but not the opinions of editors. There has to be a documentable source of the opinion.--NMajdan•talk 19:25, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I removed most of the nicknames. I left one because I found a source and a reason for the nickname. "Green Country" is not really a nickname of Tulsa but a name used in reference to the northeastern portion of the state. Tulsa is no longer the "Oil Capital of the World" so I removed that as well. And as far as "America's Most Beautiful City," I found a reference to that but it was a website marketing Tulsa and therefore not NPOV.--NMajdan•talk 19:35, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I have to say I strongly disagree, being from Tulsa myself. Both "Oil Capital of the World" and "America's most beautiful city" are common terms you hear every day in tulsa and they both have strong hitorical significance. Tulsa was founded on oil and the implications of that are still everywhere. Granted, "oil capital of the world" is more just nostalgia, but it is still a nickname of Tulsa commonly used and known by any one who has ever lived in Tulsa, even if it isn't technically relevant today.

Quote,"Both "Oil Capital of the World" and "America's most beautiful city" are common terms you hear every day in tulsa."

You hear these common terms everyday?I heard Oil Capital of the world, but then I hear That the title belongs to Houston now. Americas most beautiful city? Never heard it, so I dont see it used everyday when I have never heard it.

Second of all, I fail to see how an online article about Tulsa's road problems disproves anything. So, with that said, I will move on to say: Of course it is opinion. All nicknames are opinions and everyone has different opinions. But it was an official coined term for Tulsa in the middle 20th century, like the article says, and also like the article says, it is just a testiment to Tulsa's art, parks, location, and the "boasting" of Tulsan's that their city has abundant natural beauty. Oddly enough, it is not a term meant to seriously say Tulsa is the most beuaitful city in America--just a refrence to Tulsa's history and it current beauty. No one is going to take the term "America's most beautiful city" seriously. Besides, there are buildboards in Tulsa that call Tulsa "America's most beautiful City." I think it is perfectly justified being in the article; it has historical significance and it is a modern term also. Opinion or not, nickname's often reflect citizen's pride in the city. Wikipedia articles about cities should reflect the local flavor. Now, I wouldn't be so opposed to the paragraph in the article that referrs to the nickname to be rewritten to more strongly emphisize that it is just Tulsa lore and common bias boasting of Tulsans and not an official designation by any oragnization. Now I am sure someone is going to reply to this and disagree that Tulsa is a beautiful city but that is not the question here. The name has historical significance, and like it or not, it is used by Tulsans. Hey, it's even on billboards! Sorry for rambiling; case and point. --Okiefromokla 19:40, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

"America's Most Beautiful City" is NOT a term you hear all the time in the city. I understand the historical reasoning for "Oil Capital of the World" but unless some nationally recognized newspaper/magazine/etc named Tulsa Most Beautiful, it is opinionated and does not belong on the page. The fact is, every city wants to claim that title and unless the requirement for external, reliable sources is upheld, any city could. We want our article to be verifiable.--NMajdan•talk 19:57, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok,read this http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06023/642641.stm And this website states that Seattle "America's most beautiful city" http://news.cheapflights.com/airlines/2005/10/seattle_america.html—Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.187.154.33 (talk • contribs)

I think the first displayed website shows how common Tulsan's refer to themselves as "America's most beuatiful city". I'm not saying its litterally true. But if a website goes out to argue against that, it tells me that is is a common nickname. Wikipedia needs to capture local flavor in here too, and I think the current Tulsa wiki article explains pretty well the background for the "America's most beautiful city" in Tulsa. Also, I would ask you to re read my above comments, so I don't have to repeat that the nickname isn't meant to say that Tulsa truly is America's most beautiful city, but a simple reference to history and it's current abundance of parks, waterways and its location in the Ozarks. The simple truth is that it is a common name in Tulsa language and it should be mentioned in the wiki article. --Okiefromokla 19:52, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

NO the displayed website is saying that the title "America's most beautiful city" is wrong.How can you try to twist what they are sayiing?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.187.154.33 (talk • contribs)

Tulsa’s nickname (both in a modern and historical context) as “America’s most beautiful city” is cited in the following websites, encyclopedia articles and news articles: www.us-american-flags.com/nicknames/cities.htm, www.tulsaoklahoma.quickseek.com, www.travelok.com/travelProf/tours_packages.asp?id=48, www.virtualtulsa.com/tulsa.htm, www.tulsatvmemories.com/gb062701.html, www.batesline.com/archives/cat_tulsahistory.html, www.about-oklahoma.com, www.mayohotel.com/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=15, www.hillcrest.com/hr/physician_listings/trmc_nephrology.asp, www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11082, www.top20tulsa.com/ These articles show that Tulsa historically was known as “America’s most beautiful city” and also that it is still referred to as such today. Also, “Oil capital of the world” and “America’s most beautiful city” are both nicknames for Tulsa listed in the Wikipedia article List_of_city_nicknames_in_the_United_States—Preceding unsigned comment added by Okiefromokla (talk • contribs)

As for "Oil capital of the world", Houston, is also named that in List_of_city_nicknames_in_the_United_States, As for the other websites, they promote Tulsa to tourists, etc. Stop perpetrating a lie. As for Terra Cotta City, I like that nickname, It kinda fits Tulsa as a whole, it doesnt mean anything, its just kinda there.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.187.154.33 (talk • contribs)

You are going to open the whole article with this? What Tulsa used to be? You just proved my point excatly!!!! "Tulsa is often referred to as "Green Country," a reference to the Oklahoma Department of Tourism's designation for Northeastern Oklahoma. Also, once coined as "America's Most Beautiful City" in the middle part of the 20th Century by magazines and as a tourism tactic, the nickname remains as a tribute to Tulsa's heritage in art (the city spends millions of dollars each year in public art), its art deco architecture, its 6,000-acre park system, and its location in a typically-lush area of the Ozarks foothills". Following the "Oil Bust" of 1982-84, the title of "Oil Capital of the World" was basically relinquished to Houston, and city leaders began working to diversify the city away from a largely petroleum-based economy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.187.154.33 (talk • contribs) 15:34, July 17, 2006

What is Tulsa nicknamed currently? That should be the most important, not "was once" or "was coined"

Also the term Green country is so....OK, Much of the worlds land mass is green, how...typical—Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.187.154.33 (talk • contribs)

What is the point of this response?--NMajdan•talk 20:49, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Terra Cotta City is the current nickname and should be recognized as the current nickname.

"Oil capital of the world", America's Most Beautiful City", These nicknames are as fleeting as feathers in the wind, they dont stick unless their true.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.187.154.33 (talk • contribs)

Your condescending nature takes the fun out of editing Wikipedia. This comment is in regards to the part of your previous comment that you edited out. This article will never improve because eventually people will tire of hearing your complaints regarding every edit they make. Your idea of constructive criticism consistently flirts with the border of incivility.--NMajdan•talk 21:07, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Come on, "America's most beautiful City"? This was used as a tourism tactic, which obviously failed, Tulsa paid some magazine to label them.I dont think it is very realistic,truthful and is not in good taste to decieve readers of the Tulsa article as to it being "America's most Beautiful City" The Post-Gazette does'nt believe it [[6]]nor do Wikipedians.

"Oil Capital of the World" belongs to Houston as the article states,there can't be two oil capitals.List_of_city_nicknames_in_the_United_States,If the label "Oil Capital of the World" it should be used as "hasbeen" or "was once" and not in the opening sentences.

May I suggest a diplomatic solution for the time being? How about dropping all the nicknames, at least for now? There are a handful of cities where the nickname is indisputable & world reknown ... 'The Big Apple' for NYC & 'The City of Lights' for Paris come to mind. When someone says there are from 'The Big Apple', it doesn't cause a blank stare of confusion, nor do they say 'Which one, New York or Hackensack?'. These, I would think, are the kinds of nicknames that deserve mention in an encyclopedia. But does every city need to have a nickname mentioned just because the city infobox has a spot? Since this topic generates so much friction regarding Tulsa, maybe the time isn't right to make mention of any of it's nicknames past, present, self-proclaimed or proclaimed/used less-than-universally. How about a cool-off period? Disclaimer: I live in Tulsa. I voluntarily returned here after living on the East coast for several years. I think Tulsa's a fine city. I don't care what it's nickname is -- I call it Tulsa when people ask where I'm from. --N35w101 02:18, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, let me just say this to everyone: we, in Wikipedia, are not trying to determine if these nicknames are appropriate for the city of Tulsa or if these nicknames should be nicknames for the city of Tulsa. We are only trying to decide if they are nicknames of the city of Tulsa. Not if we like them or not. Now, we have established a credible source for "Terra Cotta City" as one nickname. It is obvious that "Oil Capital of the World" was a slogan used for many years and is still important to Tulsa today, if not for anything but nostalgia. Just for that reason, it should be mentioned in the article at the very least - and we can debate (I guess) whether it should be in the city tab. "America's Most Beautiful City" is an opinion, yes, but it is a nickname of Tulsa. And the credible sources are these: http://www.us-american-flags.com/nicknames/cities.htm , http://www.travelok.com/travelProf/tours_packages.asp?id=48 , http://http://www.about-oklahoma.com/

In any wikipedia article, 3 professional non-bias sources are enough to incorporate something into the article. Now let's face it, whether you like it, agree with it, or think it is a good nickname or not, it is there. We should drop this argument at this thought: that we should keep the mention of "America's Most Beautiful City" in the article itself, perhaps using one of those three websites as a reference. But we can keep the nickname out of the city tab, and leave "Terra Cotta City" and at least one other, because I think "Oil Capital of the World" and "Green Country" both have a pretty good basis in Tulsa and any Tulsan would tell you that those two nicknames identify with the city of Tulsa, there is no argument for that... Houston or no Houston. Compromise? --Okiefromokla 03:15, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

(I would also like to add that the fact that the post-gazzette wrote an editorial section on Tulsa being "America's most beautiful city" just proves that it is a well enough known nickname for Tulsa that a newspaper from across the country would bother trying to argue against it. We shouldn't care if they are arguing against it, we don't cite opinionated editorials in Wikipedia, just like we shouldn't care if a newspaper argues against Paris being the "City of Love". We are just trying to determine if these nicknames really do exist. Obviously, it is commonly known enough for a newspaper to write about it!) And you will get plenty of non-editorial-like results on Google under Tulsa +"America's most beautiful city" --Okiefromokla 03:23, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I'll agree with mentioning "American's Most Beautiful City" in the article as long as there is a statement explaining its not an official nickname and one more for city-marketing purposes in preserve a NPOV. Same thing for "Oil Capital of the World" as long as there is an explanation that it is more historical and Houston now has that title. "Green Country" is not a nickname for Tulsa. It is a term to refer to the entire northeastern Oklahoma and thus should not be a Tulsa nickname. In the actual Infobox, Terra Cotta City is the only one I can think of a being an actual nickname despite it not being a well-known nickname. Maybe the field should just be left blank.--NMajdan•talk 13:07, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I am pretty much satisfied with the way the article is now. "Oil capital of the world" is still in the info box and I am not going to take it off because it is an obvious nickname for Tulsa; Tulsa identifies with that nickname more than any other even though it isnt actually the oil hub of the country anymore. At the very least, leave terra-cotta city in there like you said, but I think we should just leave it how it is. The article explains the "Oil Capital of the World" thing right off the bat. --Okiefromokla 19:35, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree, We can leave it in for now, but Tulsa USED to be the Oil Capital, Tulsa does not hold that title anymore,it is not current. It should be soon.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.187.154.33 (talk • contribs)

"Oil Capital of the World" is not an official title bestowed upon a city from on high. Tulsa has been referred to by this phrase since the oil boom. Houston may also be referred to as the Oil Capital of the World, but Tulsa is known worldwide by this name. I have heard "America's Most Beautiful City" used in reference to Tulsa more times than I care to mention (not speaking to the accuracy of the statement), so I think it should stay. The term "Green Country" does not originate with the tourism department as the article suggests, but has been a term for NE Oklahoma since its recovery from the Dust Bowl. The numerous man-made lakes and irrigation projects throughout the area resulted in a green explosion. (This could be added to the article but would need citation.) I'm going to remove the tourism reference since it is inaccurate. Also, the term "Terra-Cotta City" may have been used at some point to refer to Tulsa, but it is hardly a widley use nickname. It is not as important to the culture and history of Tulsa as "Oil Capital" or even "America's Most Beautiful City". I'm going to remove this one too just because it is extraneous. --Farous 02:19, 22 August 2006.

One more thing. The city motto: "Where the South Meets the West"...um, no. That might be a tagline written by the tourist industry, but it is definitely not the city motto. Maybe "Where the North Meets the Southwest" would be more accurate, but that isn't the motto either. I'm pretty sure we don't have one so i'm axing it. --Farous 02:40, 22 August 2006.

Someone reverted the nicknames back to "Oil Capital" and "America's Most Beautiful City"

Major Changes to Article... feature status?

I have been doing a lot of list-eliminating lately. I took out the huge list of attractions and turned it into paragraphs. Its obvious when you look at the table of contents. I also made a sports team table under the "sports" subsection of the "Entertainment and Attractions" section. There is still a list of interstates and highways and it looks a little combersome but I can live with it if other people think it is OK. I think this article is getting closer to feature article status. Anyone agree? Maybe add some more references and eliminate 1 or 2 more lists? I would also like to see another picture of Tulsa's skyline and/or the Arkansas River in Tulsa added. Everyone loves pictures. Oh, and one more thing, I took out the "this section does not site its references" thing at the bottom of the page. I think the article is ok on references now, but like I said, a few more would be very good. So lets hear those suggestions for making this article fit for feature status. (or, maybe it is already fit?) --Okiefromokla 20:25, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

This article is far from featured status. Some more detailed editing and maybe put it up for peer review.--NMajdan•talk 23:39, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I tend to agree. But there is no reason it couldn't be with a little work. What exactly would you suggest, Nmajdan? We should put it on the to-do list at the top of this discussion page so we can have a list of specific things that need to be done to make it a feature article. I am not really ready to consider this article a "high quality" article and ready for peer review. But... I think we should look at Amarillo, Texas. It is listed as a "Good Article" and it has a lot of "meat" and makes the Tulsa article's sections look somewhat scrony. It also has a good assortment of pictures. Maybe we should just aim for getting Tulsa to a "good article" status and then go from there. --Okiefromokla 00:22, 24 July 2006 (UTC) ... OK, I went ahead and changed the to-do list for this article. I think these things are important for getting Tulsa to a top-notch article. --Okiefromokla 01:03, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Automated Peer review

there is a script that does an automated peer review. See User:AndyZ/peerreviewer.js it could be useful for feedback--Paul E. Ester 19:35, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh yeah, I have that. Here are the results:

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and may or may not be accurate for the article in question.

• Per WP:CONTEXT and WP:MOSDATE, months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.
• Per WP:MOS, avoid using words/phrases that indicate time periods relative to the current day. For example, recently might be terms that should be replaced with specific dates/times.
• Per WP:WIAFA, Images should have concise captions.
• Per WP:MOSNUM, there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 18mm, use 18 mm, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 18&nbsp;mm.
• Per WP:MOSNUM, when doing conversions, please use standard abbreviations: for example, miles -> mi, kilometers squared -> km², and pounds -> lb.
• Per WP:MOSNUM, please spell out source units of measurements in text; for example, "the Moon is 380,000 kilometres (240,000 mi) from Earth.
• Per WP:CONTEXT and WP:BTW, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006, but do not link January 2006.
• As per WP:MOSDATE, dates shouldn't use ^th; for example, instead of using January 30^th was a great day, use January 30 was a great day.
• Please reorder/rename the last few sections to follow guidelines at WP:GTL.
• Per WP:WIAFA, this article's table of contents (ToC) maybe too long- consider shrinking it down by merging short sections or using a proper system of daughter pages as per WP:SS.
• Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
  • While additive terms like “also”, “in addition”, “additionally”, “moreover”, and “furthermore” may sometimes be useful, overusing them when they aren't necessary can instead detract from the brilliancy of the article. This article has 33 additive terms, a bit too much.
  • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
  • Temporal terms like “over the years”, “currently”, “now”, and “from time to time” often are too vague to be useful, but occasionally may be helpful. “I am now using a semi-bot to generate your peer review.”
• As is done in WP:FOOTNOTE, for footnotes, the footnote should be located right after the punctuation mark, such that there is no space inbetween. For example, change blah blah [2]. to blah blah.[2]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that the it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 2a.

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, NMajdan•talk 19:49, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Tulsa,Oklahoma Focus

I would like to delete everything in this article that is not about the city of tulsa. That means river shopping/fish/airports in Jenks, shopping in broken arrow , the Will Rogers Memorial , J.M. Davis Arms and Historical Museum, cherokee casino, the Tulsa Metropolitan Statistical Area if such a beast exists should be in it's own article., the port of catoosa etc...

Any reasons for keeping stuff about jenks in the tulsa article? Should that not be in the jenks article. The info in wikipedia should strive to be correct and minimize redundancy on both pages.

I get the feeling the tulsa page is stealing content from other areas...There is a tulsa county article that might fit the bill for some of that. - any thoughts? --Paul E. Ester 00:30, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

No, with all due respect, I disagree absolutely and totally. The suburbs run together with the actual proper city of Tulsa, but it is all one entity in a practical and political mindset. The article does not go into depth about the suburbs (because that would be unnecessary) but it does reflect the interconnectedness of the suburbs with the parent city, Tulsa. The Jenks riverwalk and outlying museums are Tulsa tourist attractions and associated with the city of Tulsa. I see no detailed information about any of the suburbs in the article except for the highpoints of the suburbs, such as the Jenks riverwalk, museums, etc. These places feed off the city of Tulsa proper and people come to Tulsa for these places. You don’t go to Jenks for the Oklahoma Aquarium, for example... you go to Tulsa.

You can't possibly argue that because the Arco Arena, the venue for the Sacramento Kings, is outside the actual city limits of Sacramento, that the Kings shouldn't be included in the Sacramento article, or that the Dallas Cowboys shouldn't be in the Dallas wiki article because they play in Arlington. Or that the Bronx shouldn't be included in the New York City article. The Tulsa Port of Catoosa, the Jenks riverwalk, etc, are part of Tulsa. These are things that affect and apply to Tulsa immensely and shouldn't be excluded from the article. Think of it this way: if what you were suggesting were true, what would be the point of the Wiki bots adding the statistics of the metropolitan area in each large city's article? This article is about the entity of Tulsa. --Okiefromokla 03:50, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

• The Bronx is the northernmost of the five Boroughs of New York City
• The ARCO Arena is an indoor arena located in Sacramento, California
• The Dallas article appears to be of poor quality based on my quick :observation of the non encyclopedic nature of the culture section which without citiation asserts:

"Dallasites are very fond of their local sports teams especially "America's Team," the Dallas Cowboys. The Cowboys—five time Super Bowl champions—are well loved by locals, even during losing seasons, and even if another local team is a leader in its sport. Sports calendars and other memorabilia are very common, and on Sundays people tend to watch sports games on television."

They get it a little better in the sports section attributing the cowboys to irving. But I digress and disagree, the Jenks riverwalk is not part of the city of Tulsa, it is part of Jenks in Tulsa Co.

Heres an example of the problem "In addition, the city has been enticing developers to develop along the river. The "Riverwalk Crossing," a dining, shopping and entertainment walking district aside the Oklahoma Aquarium in Jenks," which city enticed the developers? which city dealt with the zoning? which city funded the infrastructure? --Paul E. Ester 07:02, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I believe the peer review is a little premature. The items in the to-do list should have been accomplished before the peer review. Nevertheless, we need to start by looking through other city articles that are featured and see their layout and content. They include Detroit, Ann Arbor, Boston, Cleveland, Louisville, KY, Marshall, Texas, San Jose, CA, and Seattle.--NMajdan•talk 13:43, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

OK. I removed the peer review. But as for the mention of the suburbs in this article, I'm glad to see someone showing an interest in trying to make some dramatic changes to this article for the better again. It’s been a while. And I agree with the ideas presented here about keeping the article focused on the city of Tulsa, despite my previous arguments. However, upon reviewing the article, there are minimal mentions of the suburbs (the only real mention is of the Jenks Riverwalk, and it is a good excuse to put a picture in). I think it is justified in this specific instance. Giving the example of the Jenks Riverwalk as "the first of many developments planned or under construction along the Arkansas River in the Tulsa area," is, in my opinion, a good way to illustrate the continued river development in the Tulsa area, which are also taking place inside the city limits. And, I would also like to point out that the city of Tulsa did indeed entice developers to develop the river in the area. These specific developers just happened to build the riverwalk in Jenks, a total of 5 feet from the "official" Tulsa city limits. (in other words, it was Tulsa that got the ball rolling for river development within its immediate area.)

Perhaps it would be better to mention the specific comparison of the Jenks Riverwalk to nearby river projects in the city limits? Such as Kings Pointe Landing?

While on the subject of suburbs, I would like to point out that Oklahoma City has a separate, albeit crude, article for its Metropolitan Area ( see here, and perhaps Tulsa should too (minus the crude part)? The TSMA doesn’t only include Tulsa county, there is much beyond that. --Okiefromokla 17:26, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

The article looks alot better, it is not as much as a tourist brochure.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.187.154.33 (talk • contribs)

Sports team logos

Someone removed the logos in the sports team table, citing some rule that logos cant simply serve a decoratve purpose. Perhaps this person should go and remove the sports team logos from the sports table in every single wikipedia article? Someone should put the logos back...--4.244.99.188 18:48, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

This is currently the subjected of a very heated debate (see here, here, here, and here to name a few). Unfortunately, the way they were used on this page does violate the fair use rules. So those image will not be coming back.--NMajdan•talk 18:57, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I want the logos there too. But I would like to point out that it is true that none of the feature article cities have their sports team's logos displayed anywhere on the page. Yes, it is unfortunate because I personally see nothing wrong with it; it might even add something to the page. People love to look at things other than words, and this is true in encylopedias just as much. But on the other hand, I see how it might be considered a violation of that rule. So yes, unfortunently until the powers that be decide otherwise theres really nothing we can do. --Okiefromokla 03:39, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

TU LAW

I just want to mention that TU law should be recognized as a world class law school and should be mentioned in the article. TU law is regarded as one of the highest ranking law schools in the country.

http://www.ilrg.com/rankings/law/index.php/4/desc/GPALow —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.187.154.33 (talk • contribs) 14:41, 24 September 2006

• Actually, TU Law is ranked rather low by the standards of US News and World Report -- it's in Tier 4, ranking 88 for 2007. TU lauds this as an "ascent", as it was ranked at 93 the previous year. --Leflyman^Talk 19:16, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Tulsa, Oklahoma/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

The article was promoted to Featured Status on May 12, 2007 (see its Nomination) Okiefromokla•talk 16:49, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 16:49, 13 May 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 20:55, 4 May 2016 (UTC)