Talk:Rochester (New York)

Does this belong?

Does this belong in the article according to our policies? -- (WT-en) Ilkirk 17:18, 29 Nov 2005 (EST)

• Stop by Park Ave Travel at 25 Buckingham Street in the historic preservation district of Park Ave. They offer friendly service and a wealth of information on local attractions and events.

Drivers' City

It seems, that RTS provides a pretty good bus system, at least to get around down-town. There are special fares for students, and all day passes for $3. I don't think that it is virtually impossible to see this city only with public transport / foot.

Map

I have added a downtown map. Let me know if you think it's useful or if you have suggestions for improvements. I intend to make a region map at some point as well. (WT-en) LtPowers 22:20, 20 June 2008 (EDT)

Okay, I've got two versions of the downtown map: which one is more useful? (WT-en) LtPowers 12:16, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

Make that three, now. (WT-en) LtPowers 17:05, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

• 
• 
• 

I've changed the map to the one in the middle above. I think it works the best. (WT-en) LtPowers 21:06, 29 July 2008 (EDT)

Too promotional?

This edit has a lot of information in it, but a quick review of the content indicates that it's largely statistics and information that's more relevant to residents (or potential residents) than to travelers. I hate to remove so much information, but I think it's really misplaced. (WT-en) LtPowers 10:47, 6 October 2009 (EDT)

Improvement request from the pub

Hi LtPowers! You ask in the pub what suggestions we might have on Rochester.

1. An overview map (not just of downtown like in the get around section or maybe bump it up in the get in like in San Francisco) would be very helpful because the small maps are good for local navigation by the relation between these maps is not clear to me.
2. The whole article just have four pictures. If a city is famous for images (no picture in the museum section) then a picture of the lakeside first picture is fine but have a look at Zurich what is really impressive) and some others would greatly improve the article. The festival section would benefit of a picture or two very much too
3. The Learn and Work section are empty. Either delete them or fill them with what Rochester has to offer.
4. Eat: I was a bit confused about this section. You write alot about Pizza and below is no listing. Why you seperate American and Burger restaurants? Burgers/hots are integral parts of the american kitchen, so i don't see the reason for two. Maybe you sort budget/midrange/splurge for american food and group the other under specialities? The Greek restaurant should be listed under greece not /Middle East because it should be clear that this cuisine's are complementary. The whole section about Wegmann's should be part of the part of the local food above. The whole written part is a bit jumping around. Maybe you start with local, then american and finally immigrant influenced kitchens but that's just one way... Now i can't see a structure.
5. Sleep: If you say that most hotels are in the suburbs than write some links so people know where to look and don't need to scroll up to the breadcrump links to find out what's in the region.

I tip my hat for the almost completely listified article. I don't even dare to dream to ever achieve that in Zurich or Berlin. (WT-en) jan 12:52, 7 May 2010 (EDT)

Thanks for the input. I'm still working on the listification and organization of the Eat section, and I intend to add a few more hotels when I get a chance to figure out which ones would be appropriate. I also do have plans for an overview map. =) Mostly I was interested in finding out if I'm on the right track with tone and style of writing, although your comments will certainly be useful! (WT-en) LtPowers 15:40, 7 May 2010 (EDT)

Imho the tone is fine only structure/thread has potential and with this style will improve. (WT-en) jan 09:14, 8 May 2010 (EDT)

Listings to add?

Possible restaurants to add once they become established:

• Tap & Table
• Trata

-- LtPowers (talk) 01:11, 5 October 2012 (CEST)

Salvatore's

It looks like someone put a lot of work into this article so I don't want to step on any toes here, but Salvatores is not where you want to send people for pizza in Rochester. Everyone I know who isn't from Rochester thinks it is the worst pizza they've ever had. I understand that many locals really like it so maybe it should stay in as a local landmark, but with a warning that you probably won't like the food.

~Godsendlemiwinks

Well, the article does say that everyone has their own favorite. But Salvatore's is the largest chain in the area; we can't just ignore it. They've gotta be doing something right. LtPowers (talk) 02:14, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

ok, what about about non-chains then? There must be some good ones worth mentioning. I like Acme on Monroe ave, but I have to admit I've never had their pizza entirely sober. I never had much luck finding a good local place during the nearly 5 years I lived there, but I lived in Henrietta for most of that time so maybe that's why. I refuse to believe a metro area with 1 million plus people doesn't have a place where someone from the east coast can get a good slice of pizza. The reason I'm so caught up on the pizza thing is that someone I work with was passing through Rochester and he was referred to salvatore's by a local. After not liking the pizza, he sort of dismissed Rochester as having terrible food (personally I think this is a kind of silly attitude) when the city actually has a lot of good places to eat. There's a really popular Italian restaurant near my hometown that is not very good (that's being polite). I listed it since someone asking about for Italian food is likely to be directed there, but with a warning about the food. Here's what I wrote: "Longtime residents love this place, but most likely for nostalgic reasons since it isn't particularly good compared with other Italian restaurants in the area. Still, the interior probably hasn't changed since it opened who knows how long ago and it's quite cheap. Consider it a cultural experience"

Maybe something along these lines would work for salvatore's? Godsendlemiwinks (talk) 17:04, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Well it's been ages since I ate at Salvatore's, but the pizza can't be that bad if they get enough business to support two score locations in and around a single city. "Someone from the east coast" is likely used to much better pizza than locals, but not all of our travelers are from the east coast, either. That said, a review of the comments at RocWiki indicate some support for the view that Salvatore's pizza is more ubiquitous than good. We should probably adjust the listing and prose to reflect some debate over the quality. LtPowers (talk) 18:02, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

How about "New York style purists should probably avoid pizza in Rochester since they will most likely be disappointed. With so many good places to eat, just pick somewhere else. If you're open to a different style of pizza, feel free to give one of the local places a try. "for the pizza paragraph in the section about Rochester food? Godsendlemiwinks (talk) 18:42, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

That's a bit harsh, don't you think? It's not like Rochester is any more of a NY-style-pizza wasteland than anyplace else in the country. For instance, The Rochester NY Pizza Blog recommends The Pizza Stop as having very good NY-style pizza. But I don't see any particular reason to focus on NY-style over others as far as giving advice goes. LtPowers (talk) 21:16, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Maybe it just needs a more in depth description of what "Rochester" style pizza is. How you put it is basically how I'd describe it to someone, but I'm not sure they would really understand until they saw it. Maybe a picture would help. The reason I specified NY style is because Rochester is in NY state and most people don't realize how big of a state it is. They will probably assume everywhere in NY state has NY style pizza, even though most of New England is closer to NYC than western NY. Anyone whose been to Syracuse will be even more confused since its only about 70 miles from Rochester, but is in my experience overwhelmingly NY style pizza. While we're at it, there should be a description for what a white hot is. I'd never heard of them until I moved to Rochester so I don't think they're a nationally known thing. Godsendlemiwinks (talk) 00:33, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Let me take a stab at adjusting the pizza text a bit, see if it suits you better. LtPowers (talk) 15:19, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

That works. Godsendlemiwinks (talk) 01:02, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I added a description for white hots, but I'm not sure I have the flavor right since I haven't had one in about a year. Godsendlemiwinks (talk) 00:50, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

I could have sworn there was a description in there before, but a perusal of the history indicates otherwise. Thanks for adding it. LtPowers (talk) 15:19, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Alternative banner for this article?

In the Hebrew Wikivoyage we are currently using this banner instead of the one which is currently used here. Do you think too that this banner would would better than the existing one? ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 06:56, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

No, not in this case. I don't really like the composition and prefer the pretty flowers. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:54, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Tone and prose

I really have some problems with this edit, but since I reverted it once and it was put back in, I'm coming here to discuss it.

Pinging User:50.195.72.217 so that the user is aware of this discussion.

Here are the changes I disagree with and why:

1. The change of the airport URL from http://www.ROCairport.com to http://www2.monroecounty.gov/airport-index.php

   We have a history of preferring shorter URLs to longer ones, and more readable URLs to less. As well, the former is likely to remain valid even if Monroe County changes the organization of their web site, while the latter is not.

2. Changing "six" to "6"

   Normal grammar rules suggest spelling out numerals ten and below.

3. Removal of carriers and addition of destinations

   While I can see how the list of destinations is useful, it's also a freakin' bear to maintain, as it changes relatively often. (Less so for ROC but other cities see frequent changes.) But even assuming we want the list of destinations to stay, I don't see what purpose it serves to remove mention of JetBlue and Southwest in favor of just saying that "most" airlines fly out of ROC.

4. Removal of the bus paragraph

   I'm not too bothered about the addition of a link to the bus route page, though it's really unnecessary; the real problem is the conversion of the detailed prose into a boring list. The list fails to explain the inconvenience of RTS service for getting out of the airport, and it also doesn't explain how the airport is the only reliable place to hire a taxi without calling ahead.

5. The warning paragraph on the Amtrak environment

   Really, now. Calling the area "seedy" is an overstatement, and removing the parenthetical "this is Amtrak after all" just seems pointless.

I'd appreciate any further thoughts.

-- Powers ^(talk) 13:05, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Copyedits

"Recently" and similar words are words to avoid for two reasons:

1. they become out of date quickly and editors may not know that the information should be updated, and
2. readers don't know when this was written -- here is lots of information in Wikivoyage written as far back as 2007 (or possibly earlier), so it would be a mistake to assume everything is up to date.

For example, "Wegmans recently replaced their old East Avenue store" is wrong. They replaced it five years ago. When my edits we're partially reverted, User:LtPowers incorrectly assumed that the information was still up to date.

Since December 2013, the article has been describing wine bars as a "recent innovation". Now that that it's been 4½ years, the innovation isn't so recent, is it?

When did the food truck scene explode? Was it in the years that are recent to 2018, or recent to 2014, or recent to 2007?

Manufacturing employment in New York State fell by about 75% from 1970 to 2010, and then has been stable since. I don't think we should describe the decline as recent. It is now historical.

Generally in Wikivoyage we use numbers instead of words where possible -- 19th century" is shorter and easier to read than "nineteenth century", so why wouldn't we use it? We're not aiming for formal writing here - quite the opposite.

"And more" is a phrase we should avoid - this is a travel guide, not advertising copy.

Including the past dates of events makes the guide look out of date - it is better to provide the general description of the timing ("First Sa in May", "Mid-May", "mid-Jun"...) as the article does.

Why is it important for the traveller to know that bartenders started getting together to share recipes in 2014? Does knowing when this started enhance the travel experience?

"Ubiquitous" means "being everywhere at the same time". Something is either ubiquitous or it's not. It can't be "a little ubiquitous", "somewhat ubiquitous" or "overwhelmingly ubiquitous". Ground Zero (talk) 02:04, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

As I've had no response to these comments from 11 days ago, and as the reversion restored factual errors and words to avoid, I'm going to restore my edits. I am pleased to discuss these changes further. Reverting edits without being willing to discuss them is not an appropriate way of dealing with disputes. Ground Zero (talk) 14:12, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Still a Guide?

After years of stagnation, during which I only made occasional changes, I've completed a thorough review of this article for anything that's out of date, as well as adding several new listings. I feel like it's in a decent state but I no longer feel like I have a good sense of what makes a good article. (Or a Guide article.) I'd be interested in outside opinions and suggestions for further improvements.

Note that the maps still need to be updated. That will be my next step, but I didn't want to do that before making sure the listings were more-or-less complete.

One concern I have is the number of listings. I've got over 50 restaurants in here, though broken up by price range. It feels like a lot -- it's certainly a lot of markers on the map. Is it too many? Should I subdivide them further? (And not just the Eat listings; the Do sections is also quite voluminous, and the Buy section is largely undivided.)

-- Powers ^(talk) 01:13, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

From a quick glance, the article looks great to me. I'd say it's easily guide status – thanks for the update! I'm planning to visit Rochester later this year, so this will be useful for me.

I think subdividing the long lists sounds like a good idea. Restaurants could possibly be subdivided by neighborhood (like we do in Oakland) or by cuisine (like in Rock Hill) in addition to price. —Granger (talk · contribs) 19:07, 11 July 2024 (UTC)