Talk:Colorado City, Arizona

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

How to edit this U.S. City Entry[edit]

Wondering how to edit this U.S. City Entry?
The WikiProject U.S. Cities standards might help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rambot (talk • contribs) 03:33, July 28, 2003‎ (UTC)

I think its perfect as it is.
Antonio 1,000 partners Martin — Preceding undated comment added 11:21, July 13, 2005‎ (UTC)

Text moved to other article[edit]

I moved the news addition to the FLDS Church article. Please check it for factual accuracy. Tom Haws 15:42, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

Ironic statement[edit]

"There were 444 households out of which 83.1% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 85.8% were married couples living together,"

I stress the irony of this statement --bī-RŌ 06:44, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Link needed[edit]

Could someone please include this link to the ABC News Primetime that featured this city? The documentary aired on Feb 13, 2007."ABC News" Dcmetro 11:03, 15 February 2007 (UTC)Dcmetro[reply]

FBI's most wanted[edit]

I'm curious as to why Jeff gets put on the FBI's most wanted. He "expelled" people? What kind of crime is that? Did he physically attack them or beat them with sticks or something? Or did he incite others to threaten them? How is this a federal crime? How does one man "give" another man's wives and children to someone else? I assume there are kidnapping or false imprisonment charges against him - but, in the history of Colorado City, his sudden appearance on the Most Wanted List seems to come out of nowhere. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kaimiikekamaila (talk • contribs) 23:00, August 20, 2007 (UTC).

Negative attitude towards the FLDS[edit]

This page is obviously written with a negative attitude towards the FLDS. Asides what you might think about them, the article should be neutral in theme. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.186.83.159 (talk) 02:46, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's good in this case as you can't make it neutral without fudging the truth. And they are scum. 72.154.144.180 (talk) 19:43, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it can be written neutrally rather than repeating opinions, insinuations, and inflections of a few that obviously having a raging hatred toward all of them (case in point, look at the above comment). You say they are scum; I live in the Southern Utah area and have now worked with so many of them and only see higher values at least attempted to be lived by them in a quiet, but consistent way and yet when articles like this are read, it seems so much is left out. Is Wikipedia supposed to be a reflection of actual knowledge, or just another piece of political/activist machinery? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.252.155.225 (talk) 18:57, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Violation of copyright policy[edit]

I just removed the material added in this edit as a copyvio of this source. If readded, that material needs to be completely rewritten so that it is neither a direct quotation nor a close paraphrase. It's too long for permissible use under Wikipedia:Non-free content (NFC) as a direct quote, so the attempt to just put it in quotation marks isn't enough to fix the problem. (Moreover, it's been rearranged and parts have been omitted without indication, which also violates NFC.) I have no objection to it going back in, just so long as it's not a copyright violation. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 14:08, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cooke et al v. Colorado City, Town of et al[edit]

Normally I wouldn't suggest adding a lawsuit to a city page as most the time they have nothing to do with the history of the town. After all if included every lawsuit against the New York or LA for falling on the sidewalk, the page would be huge.

However, I think this case against this town is unique. It was all about if the town is discriminatory against non-FLDS people and if the Town allows FLDS members access to city government property (i.e. police cameras). I think that perhaps this lawsuit has a place on this page. After all if the city government of New York started to discriminate against a particular religion, then it might be relevant.

Some Sources:

  • Dobner, Jennifer (29 January 2014). "Arizona couple living near polygamous sect sues for discrimination". Reuters. Retrieved 24 March 2014.
  • "RECAP Home Archive About Search Cooke et al v. Colorado City, Town of et al". Arizona District Court (azd) Docket Number: 3:10-cv-08105. Retrieved 24 March 2014.
  • Dalrymple II, Jim (20 March 2014). "Family wins lawsuit against polygamous towns, gets millions". Salt Lake Tribune. Retrieved 24 March 2014.
  • Dalrymple II, Jim (21 March 2014). "Arizona AG plans to 'eradicate' discrimination in polygamous towns". Salt Lake Tribune. Retrieved 24 March 2014.

However, I wanted to know what others think before I put anything up.--ARTEST4ECHO (talk/contribs) 20:38, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think you have made a good case for including this information. -- 208.81.184.4 (talk) 15:31, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Caption for picture of girls[edit]

Currently this article has a picture of girls working on the side of a street in Colorado City. They appear to have full length, mono-color dresses common to FLDS (or possibly other fundamentalists). The caption reads "Young Mormon girls wearing primitive clothing and doing physical labor, 2014." I think this description could be improved upon. It brings to my mind primary-age LDS children wearing loin cloths while working the fields.

Forgive me if I sound nit-picky here, but I want to explain my reasoning before changing the caption. That way if others disagree, this is a place where we can hear each other out.

The word "Mormon" most often refers to LDS members, although it is applicable for others in the wider Latter Day Saint movement. Perhaps in this case "fundamentalist Mormon" or "FLDS" would be better, or just leave off the inferred religion altogether (although I'm sure they're FLDS). The word "young" is also unclear for me, as these girls are taller than their fences. Are they teenagers? The word "primitive" seems to cast judgment on their cultural fashions, and is certainly subjective. The phrase "physical labor" can be ambiguous, sometimes referring to heavy labor. These girls appear to be sweeping the sidewalk.

I propose something like "Girls working outside in traditional clothing, 2014." Thoughts? ——Rich jj (talk) 20:48, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You should go to the description as provided by the author of the photograph, which is basically this caption. Although I do agree it can be improved upon, but with keeping the accuracy. I wouldn't be adverse to: "Young LDS women in traditional clothing sweeping the sidewalk". Onel5969 (talk) 21:12, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
To differentiate between FLDS and LDS, how about this: "Young women in traditional FLDS clothing sweeping the sidewalk."" ——Rich jj (talk) 18:35, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Colorado City, Arizona. 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 11:57, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Colorado City, Arizona. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:04, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Colorado City, Arizona. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:47, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Drastic population decrease[edit]

Is there any particular reason as to why the population decreased by 48% between 2010 and 2020? I've noted a similar question on the Hildale article. 86.41.202.106 (talk) 23:13, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Colorado_City,_Arizona&oldid=1206752131"