Talk:Urban decay

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Article needs rewrite[edit]

Seriously, it's full of weird racist comments, directed at pretty much every ethnic group. It also contradicts itself sometimes in the same paragraph. Thirdly it uses the Cato institute as a source, aren't those guys paid by the Koch brothers to say whatever fits their agenda? Biased sources are not sources The tone of the article is highly partisan, it looks like someone of one political group got on here and wrote a bunch of stuff, then someone from the other political group got here and wrote a bunch of stuff, and now we have a partisan article full of misinformations that contradicts itself and reads like a Facebook argument. Needs rewriting for neutrality, racism, bad sourcesTaurich (talk) 15:17, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Racism[edit]

I understand the phenomenon of "white flight" but parts of this article make it seem like racism is the #1 cause of urban decay. Suburbanization is not a purely racist process. I think this page should be a little more neutral on the topic

I have the same comment. Yes, it is true suburbanization is a leading cause of urban decay, but using the term "white flight" is not appropriate. It brings a racist aspect into an article that has nothing to with race. A better term would be the one I used, "suburbanization", and editing that paragraph to fit it. If noone else does this after a while, I'll do it, it's just a small edit changing a couple sentences. 65.23.209.180 (talk) 03:51, 11 June 2011 (UTC)CTL[reply]

"...xenophobic immigration restrictions."

'Xenophobic' here is a value judgment and, further, an unverified assumption about the psychology of those behind immigration restrictions. It should just be "immigration restrictions" without 'xenophobic'. This is not neutral; it is clearly written from a liberal perspective. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.116.170.13 (talk) 17:15, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Problems[edit]

Free trade causes urban decay? I have never heard this argument. If anyone can find any sources which can back up such an assertion, make it known. Until then, it's gone. Seriously, though, this article requires major work. I do not consider myself qualified to re-write it, but at the very least I think I could figure out how to best reorganize the section-breakdown of the article. If you have any suggestions, please post them. -Max

Hey Max, I have included a link to economic restructuring. This can better illustrate how free trade/globalization indirectly contributes to urban decay. The idea being a shift from manufacturing to service sector outlets depletes the industrial base from urban cities and moves them to low-cost sites in smaller metropolitan areas (smaller SMSAs) and even overseas. That's why Philadelphia, Baltimore, Detroit, and other previous industrial landscapes show signs of urban decay and infrastructure disrepair. See economic restructuring for a better analysis. -Parfait —Preceding unsigned comment added by Socipoet (talk • contribs) 12:00, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would say that the aesthetic side of the issue should be addressed, some individuals find the decay to be exciting and beautiful, as opposed to an unsightly blemish -ratc

At the end of the first paragraph, the following sentence appears: "Urban decay and gentrification are opposite processes, mirror images of each other." This is simply inaccurate. The definition of gentrification, as it appears in The Dictionary of Human Geography appears as follows: "The reinvestment of CAPITAL at the urban centre, which is designed to produce space for a more affluent class of people than currently occupies that space. The term…has mostly been used to describe the residential aspects of this process but this is changing, as gentrification itself evolves" (Smith, 2000, p. 294). Gentrification is thus principally associated to the displacement and marginalization of struggling and working classes. To say that the opposite of urban decay is gentrification is to say that cities should be trying to promote class-based segregation. Consider revising this claim. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bohomoto (talk • contribs) 18:04, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shaw1990 (talk) 10:08, 2 April 2009 (UTC)Urban Decay is created when poor people are the only ones left in an area. The white flight is to blame for the urban problems because of the fact European based individuals leave an area simply because minorities are moving in. They take away all of the business that would have been able to give jobs to those who were in need. Racial tension in cities still exists today which is proven in such cities as Milwaukee, St. Louis, Newark, Detroit etc. The other causes include the easy access to guns, drugs that the government supplies to these areas. Other things include the fact that some business will not hire minorities causing them to live in an undesirable environment and making them do whatever it takes for them to survive and feed their families.[reply]

expansion[edit]

Okay i reckon the european bit is as big as it should be - we need more american stuff - br The stuff about french cities is very useful - it is true that generally speaking in the vast majority of european cities it is the suburbs and not the historical cores that have deacayed (esp in france and italy) although the UK is quite different. Writing and actually managing to source this wont be easy though. Thoughts? - br This has been up for expansion for ages now. Any ideas anyone? Seems to do the job... some pictures maybe? -br

france[edit]

Hi there, I am French... I feel it is right to mention the French problem.

However I also feel it falls into other considerations : unlike (I guess) US or other more "liberal" countries, those suburbs are part of the French welfare system, and enjoy benefits that I guess do not exist to the same extent in the US : those projects are usually controlled by State organisations, and intended to bring housing to poor families. That means rents are close to nothing, families get the welfare money (if you have no job revenues, it will allow you to survive, but not more), and enjoy REAL FREE medical care and FREE education like anybody in France, including higher education (almost free university, around US$ 800 a year). State hospitals provides patients with the best care in France and everybody really gets the same service. However, there are usually fewer physicians in those neighboorhoods. Regarding education, state school within those neighborhoods suffer from the same problems as the US : unmotivated teachers usually doing their best to "famous" schools, no control on the kids, and sometimes school violence.

Some kind of free investment areas and incentives have also been created to attract some level of trade and business in few of those places, without much positive results.

In other words, though high level of welfare and subsidies that you get in France, it has been "easy" to create what is called "urban decay" here.

So I feel it would be interesting to compare U.S. and other countries situation, how "urban decay" has been created, in which environment, solutions found, etc...

Hello 'french person'! I wouldnt agree - Urban Decay of surburban estates replaced inner city slums in both the UK and France, its certainly not caused by the fact these people have decent social welfare, if they did'nt they'd just be even worse off. The cause is simply a concentration of poverty in one place - like the projects in the inner cities of America. The only proven solution so far has been mixed developments with affodable rented next to and within private sector - germany, the netherlands and the Uk lead on this, its a very european solution though. - Err this may be beyond you and me, such a detailed analysis of course and effect would require a really well well resarched and academically sourced study. - br

OK, true... "French person"

misc[edit]

1st sentence 'and frogs legs'?!?! - grafitee, changed

Break down by county[edit]

It seems like it would be appropriate for this article to be broken down into sections by county, US/UK/Cananda/other EU countries etc.--167.80.244.204 17:02, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Links to add?[edit]

futurebird 00:53, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Gentrification is a "remedy"? What gentrified drug was that author smoking? All it does it push poor people somewhere else so they can "decay" another area. Hulme is filtering into Moss Side and Rusholme. East Londoners are being pushed East by The City and South/West by the impending 2012 Olympics.

A lot of the remedy section and some of the overview seem fairly partisan on the issue, even if the author expresses ideas I agree with. The wholly negative look at freeways for their effect on urban areas is maybe harder to defended a neutral point-of-view, but it's still a little slanted to look at projects taken under the banner of urban renewal perpetrated by the federal government and Robert Moses types as wholly negative in their impact to urban areas. Also, the whole stuff about gentrification and new urbanism being the solution... that could come out of Kunsler's books, and he certainly has his critics. At least qualify that a little.

I forgot how to log on to wikipedia, and don't really use it much, so someone else can fix all this.

68.209.119.35 15:28, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to add a link to my photo case study of the decay of a neighborhood in Detroit "Detroit: In The Green Zone", the urban prairie near the intersection of Joseph Campau and Gratiot Avenues. * http://www.victoriansecrets.net/detroitgreenzone.htm 98.218.140.177 (talk) 00:14, 8 April 2010 (UTC) Peter[reply]

Unmaintained lawns[edit]

Mention that it all it takes is one person missing mowing their lawn just once to start the downward spiral :-)

Anyway, do mention lawns. Jidanni 20:16, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 05:56, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Promises" image[edit]

The image/caption combination seems to have a bit too much of a "the man lied to us" vibe, and seems a little too artificial in the message being conveyed. Whereas it could merely state the basic facts regarding their dual visits to that location to address urban decay, it instead simplifies/mischaracterizes their appearances as promise-making sessions (false ones at that), to make it fit with the image and thus make a point about Washington's lack of action. While this is fine for editorials, or leftist human interest blogs, it really has no place here, in my opinion. But I'll submit that to the rest of you and will wait to hear some other thoughts on it. NeutronTaste (talk) 04:36, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More Images Please[edit]

There are more places with Urban Decay maybe you can add some pictures of South Central Los Angeles —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.126.218.129 (talk) 23:39, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Harappa, Mohenjo Daro, Ancient Rome, Luoyang, Angkor, etc.[edit]

This article suffers from wp:recentism, and thus fails to mention many of the ancient cities that have gone into the dark or declined before the 19th century, such as the above-mentioned towns. How does historical urban decay compare to modern urban decay? 68.36.120.7 (talk) 03:08, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Historical urban decay is a study under history, and has to do with the development of human civilization. "Urban decay" defines modern urban regions being abandoned. Undoubtedly, after a few years (decade maybe) the trends in urban decay we are experiencing now will act the same as those in history, showing how civilization shifts from one focus to another (hunting to farming, farming to industry, industry to technology, and now we have technology shifting to a new focus). Does this make any sense to you? 65.23.209.180 (talk) 03:56, 11 June 2011 (UTC)CTL[reply]

Ummmm, farming, hunting and industry *are* technologies. If you take technology away from humanity we're just a bunch of monkeys sitting in a tree Taurich (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The city is descended from the town which is descended from the village/hamlet which is descended from a hunter-gatherer campsite. There are according to Wikipedia at least 50,000 tells scattered around the Earth, mostly from Eastern Europe to the Orient. There are probably many more undiscovered and undiscoverable. Most of these probably began as campsites for a band of hunter-gatherers. Thence they evolved to become villages, towns, cities, and then, piles of dirt. Urban dwelling is apparently an inherently unstable form of existence. Those urban cites that manage to remain viable beyond five hundred years usually are found to have housed successive civilizations each of which devoured its predecessor(s); the urban site remains; its founders are long gone.

The hunter-gatherer, whether homo sapiens or pithecanthropus somethingorother was/is an extremely successful species which as other successful species destroyed and does destroy its environment. Adaptable as we are we seem never to have solved urban living, where our hunter-gatherer glands - reproductive and adrenal - become roadblocks to survival.

I seem to see overtones of political correctness in various places above. It seems a shameful state of affairs when scholars must consult the ghosts of Goebbels and Molotov for final approval before publishing their ideas.

N. E. Frye. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.69.189.47 (talk) 15:30, 14 January 2015 (UTC) Sorry.[reply]

98.69.189.47 (talk) 23:35, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Urban decay. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

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

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:32, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

More Historic examples + Overlap[edit]

I have 2 Problems with this article: 1) missing historic aspect of the problem: I can understand that this article isn't really about history but I guess it would be good if some historic examples would at least be mentioned in order to show that this isn't just a modern problem. Some links would be enough. You don't have to discuss it in depth. One of the most drastic examples I know of is Rome after the fall of the western empire. A city that had a bit less than a million inhabitants in antiquity and shrank to about 30k? inhabitants during the early middle ages before it started to grow again. (Quote from the Rome wiki site: Its population declined from more than a million in 210 AD to 500,000 in 273[41] to 35,000 after the Gothic War,[42] reducing the sprawling city to groups of inhabited buildings interspersed among large areas of ruins, vegetation, vineyards and market gardens.[43])

There are also examples where large towns completely disappeared (Babylon, Memphis and Thebes(Egypt), Karakorum etc. → Lost_city)

2) Several articles about this topic seem to be overlapping: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counterurbanization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrinking_cities etc... It might be good to either distinguish or combine those articles. If you only want to talk about the current problem since the article is meant to be part of a series about sociology/economy or something like that... it should clearly be mentioned. Furthermore we would require links to some page about historic urban decay. I was searching about the historic examples for the decay of cities and wikipedia pointed me to this article, which in it's current form is not really helpful I think. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valmendil (talk • contribs) 03:01, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Remove photo of Camden[edit]

That photo is Arlington Street, which was evacuated due to radioactive Thorium poisoning from the nearby General Gas Mantle Company. That is NOT urban decay, and certainly not typical of situation in Camden. This photo should be removed. --SlushyMix (talk) 03:31, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

France section[edit]

This one has been tagged for the better part of a decade. Alas, I'm largely unfamiliar with their urban landscape and planning. Can anyone familiar with said care to improve the section? Thanks. Surv1v4l1st ╠Talk║Contribs╣ 21:07, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Multiculturalism[edit]

“Multiculturalism” was added on the 3rd by an IP. Political shots aside, do other editors agree with this? Should it be removed? 2A00:23C6:95CE:B401:954B:92B8:FC88:29CB (talk) 22:58, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"🏚️" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

The redirect 🏚️ has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 10 § 🏚️ until a consensus is reached. Utopes (talk / cont) 07:21, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Urban_decay&oldid=1194731004"