Talk:Aurora, Colorado

How bad is the pollution?

How good is the air quality / how bad is the pollution?

City Council information needs to be updated

See https://auroragov.org/cms/one.aspx?pageId=16393923 for details.--Aurorapio (talk) 17:38, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Oct 2024v addition of Venezuelan Tren de Aragua gang politics content

Please make a case for including the claims and politics associated with Venezuelan Tren de Aragua here. Link to disputed content [1]. My view is this is supposed to be a high level article about the town. The content in question is a transitory, outage of the month sorry of thing. It may not survive the 10 year test and certainly isn't the sort of specific, political topic that needs to be in a high level overview of a town. Springee (talk) 20:51, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

The rumor has been confirmed true. You can check it out here:

https://x.com/CbzManagement/status/1844823369394376838

https://www.cbsnews.com/colorado/news/colorado-venezuelan-gang-activity-aurora-crime-woman-moves-video-guns/

It's important to include because it was thrust into the spotlight, and because the original text claimed that it was false (which is not true). DrMcLego (talk) 20:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

The tweets are not reliable sources. The CBS story describes one woman's complaints. From that single source, there doesn't seem to be much doubt that crime exists in the area. The same can be said of certain neighborhoods in all major cities. Some of it could be gang-related. The video of a single incident with three boys with guns is also alarming to those living in that building, but none of this even approaches the lies Trump is telling about Aurora. The police wrote: "It would be improper at this time for the city and APD to make any conclusory statements about specific incidents or provide details about law enforcement strategy and operations. Based on our initial investigative work, we believe reports of TdA influence in Aurora are isolated." The mayor and governor have both explained how this is grossly exaggerated so much it is basically false, even if there is a single event with three boys that is true. They explained that crime is down in the area, it's a wonderful place to live, and that, like everywhere else in the United States, there is a lower crime rate among illegal immigrants than among U.S. citizens. You won't hear those facts at a MAGA rally. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 20:26, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

First off, I am not a Trump Fan, to make that clear.

Furthermore, what do you mean the tweets are not reliable sources??? The owner of the apartment buildings literally confirmed, with video evidence, also with a photo of their manager bruised and bleeding, and then more video evidence of his attack, then local reporters also broke the story on the thread. I would argue that the Mayor and Governor are unreliable because they're trying to deflect blame when national attention is placed on them.

Again the owners literally confirmed everything...wouldn't the owners know if they had lost control of their apartment complexes??? DrMcLego (talk) 14:59, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Tweets, at least alone, are not considered RS, except within the biographical article of the subject, per WP:Aboutself. You would need several reliable secondary sources that put this in context as seen by outside examiners of the situation. Those personally involved often have a warped sense of the full facts and significance of what happened. They are too close to the situation. Yes, crimes occurred. No one is disputing that. The police do not back up the story as it is told. They describe it as an "isolated" incident. Regardless of any of this, this is not anything like what Trump has described. Try to find better sourcing. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 17:44, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

And to follow up, local FBI and Homeland Security informed CBZ Management that it was, in fact, gang activity behind the apartment complexes. DrMcLego (talk) 15:00, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

None of this minutiae matters to the article – that a landlord may have “lost control of an apartment complex” is not a significant event in the 133-year history of a city of 400,000 people. Trorov (talk) 15:59, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

I agree. All of this seems UNDUE and I don't see a consensus for inclusion of anything beyond 1-2 sentences if even that. Springee (talk) 17:01, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

The content should be included, as Donald Trump has thrust Aurora into the national/global spotlight, first in a presidential debate, then at an Aurora rally yesterday when he announced "Operation Aurora," based on a 1798 law and predicated on a false rumor. soibangla (talk) 21:29, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

It's transitory. These sort of short term, splash in the pan, political hot topics shouldn't be included in high level summary coverage of a town. Springee (talk) 22:22, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Trorov, you have twice restored the disputed material without explaining why it is due. Please do not edit war and please do make your case here. Springee (talk) 00:05, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Isn’t this rich, Springee the edit warrior lectures others not to edit war. First of all, this is an article about a CITY, not a “town” (what towns do you know of have 400,000 residents and cover 164 square miles?)

During the recent presidential debate, Aurora was name-checked in front of an audience of at least 67 million people. This kind of spotlight is certainly a moment in the city’s history, as is having a former president / presidential candidate visit the city – especially since the city *itself* was the underlying reason for the visit! This level of media attention is comparable to what Aurora received following the 2012 theater shooting (which also prompted a presidential visit) or due to the death of resident Elijah McClain (which some may argue was also a “political hot topic”) – so why aren’t you asserting that these events are also “undue”, “transitory”, not “high level” enough for an accounting of the city’s history, and removing them as well? Trorov (talk) 05:57, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Please understand that you are violating ONUS by restoring that content. In this case the gang in apartments story isn't about the town, it may have taken place in the town but the location is largely a backdrop. This is basically a flash in the pan story that won't have any long term impact on the high level summary of the town. That is why it's undue. Springee (talk) 11:29, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Continuing to refer to the subject of the article as a “town” when it is literally and legally “the City of Aurora” doesn’t lend your arguments much credibility. In any case, say what you will about the rumors, but Aurora was not just a “backdrop” for Trump’s visit – Aurora was specifically visited because of the life Trump had given the rumors. This story is relevant to the city’s history, particularly because of its significant immigrant population and because Aurora’s diversity has become a key element of its identity. Trorov (talk) 18:54, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

That's the best argument you have? That I call the place a town? Yes, if this story happened in some other Colorado town it the location would have been just as notable. I think what you are confusing is reciprocity of weight. While the fact that this thing happened in Aurora might be notable in context of a story about the claims, this isn't notable in context of a high level article about the town. Springee (talk) 02:04, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Go find an actual town to edit war about, this city has just experienced one of the few times in its history that it received national media attention, and the events of recent days and weeks are the only reason millions of people have ever heard of it. End of story. Watkinsian (talk) 04:48, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

You are misunderstanding ONUS. Carlp941 (talk) 13:22, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Still seems transitory to me. If we see this story sustain itself a little longer in reliable sources I am open to adding the content again. Carlp941 (talk) 13:18, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

• Keep it. It's a significant event for such gross and debunked lies to damage the reputation of Colorado and its third-largest city. The original Republicans who started the false rumors have retracted their claims, but Trump revived them and gave them national prominence as part of his racist anti-immigrant spiel against his political rival. It has gotten significant coverage in all major media, with the mayor and governor debunking the lies and defending the reputation of the city and Colorado. It thus has become a sad event that put the city on the map in a very nasty way. Most people only know of Aurora from this one blast of lies from Trump. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 16:03, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

  Flash in the pan events are just that. If this is still notable a year or two from now (ie still being discussed) then we should talk about inclusion. As is, it looks oddly partisan that an article that is mostly about the town's geography, infrastructure, etc has a whole paragraph devoted to a single political talking point. I would also note that the other two specific topics have primary articles on the subject. This one doesn't. That again suggest it should have little weight here. Springee (talk) 02:08, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

  no one can predict the future, but there is at least as much reason to believe people will avoid Aurora and thus damage its economy for years to come because years ago they heard from a "reliable source" that it's overrun by Venezuelan terrorists, as there is reason to believe this is a fleeting event. in the meantime. in the midst of a presidential campaign, a candidate has smeared a city to advance his stock political narrative that America is being invaded by really bad guys, some of whom eat your cats, placing the city conspicuously on the map of national attention. this is the most notable thing about Aurora ever, so the content should be included. soibangla (talk) 02:55, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

I think the current version is way overblown. One sentence, maybe two, seems due to me. If it becomes a bigger issue in the future (as opposed to fading away, which seems way more likely) then it can be expanded. Shinealittlelight (talk) 13:09, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

I agree with Springee - this is way overblown, and written in a way that is inconsistent with the rest of the article. It's a glowing red pile of election-brain in what should be a high-level article. I'd acquiesce to a one sentence mention if that's all we can get consensus for. Riposte97 (talk) 08:57, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

this needs to be removed, it is filled with inaccurate reports that is still under police investigation. you can see it is being added only for political vengeance from the users trying to add it 47.150.1.99 (talk) 16:24, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

new evidence came out yesterday detailing these incidents from the apartment management company

https://www.denver7.com/news/front-range/aurora/apartment-owner-doubles-down-on-tren-de-aragua-claims-in-newly-created-social-media-account 47.150.1.99 (talk) 16:29, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

In my mind, when the entry was just about a "Venezuealan gang rumor" it was more transitory but this changed with the presidential debate and subsequent rally. Thus my edit changed the heading to "2024 U.S. Presidential Election" and made it about the debate/rally but did incorporate soibangla's gang rumor detail. I agree that we don't need all the play-by-play, but it has to be explained at some level why Aurora was mentioned at the debate and why a rally was held there (Colorado is not a competitive state) - and it's because of the rumors. If soibangla agrees, perhaps s/he could edit the rumor material down to 1-2 sentences tops. For instance, I did leave out the sentence with Jurinsky's Fox News appearance and quotes, but soibangla added it back. Trorov (talk) 02:03, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

What about this admission? 32.132.147.30 (talk) 18:38, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Here’s some new evidence. https://denvergazette.com/news/tren-de-aragua-gang-denver-aurora-police-emails/article_30cc1132-9183-11ef-bcdd-cf4cf51edf71.amp.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/us-border-crisis/article-13993445/tren-aragua-migrant-gang-colorado-aurora-apartment.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13998399/amp/aurora-resident-tren-aragua-gang-reveals-vote.html Startrain844 (talk) 19:29, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

You really need to use reliable sources, not deprecated ones. (I removed them as we should not even read them, and definitely not place them on a talk page.) Then find ones that connect it with what Trump said, otherwise you'd be violating WP:SYNTH. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 21:35, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

I have restored the links. It is extremely rude to edit others' comments. Riposte97 (talk) 08:11, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

It's also wrong to use deprecated and unreliable sources. Sources of misinformation and disinformation should not be read in real life, except for research, and they should not be used at Wikipedia. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 14:49, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

We're all adults here. Riposte97 (talk) 20:15, 30 October 2024 (UTC)