Talk:Sedona, Arizona

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sedona, Arizona article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

United States: Arizona Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Arizona portal This article is supported by WikiProject Arizona (assessed as Mid-importance).

Rock type

Declared in the article as sandstone unique to the area - I was informed by a knowlegable guide that it is Redwall Limestone, which is also found in lower portions of the Grand Canyon. Is there a geologist out there? - Leonard G. 03:41, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Redwall Limestone is found in the lower Grand Canyon but it is not exposed in Sedona. Nearly all of the Red Rock formations around Sedona were eroded out of the Schnebly Hill Formation. There is also quite a bit of Coconino Sandstone in Sedona but this is a white-tan colored rock, this is a younger rock layer and is found near the top of Wilson Mountain and along the rim of Oak Creek Canyon. There are also a few scattered exposures of the Hermit Shale and Esplanade Sandstone in NE Sedona. There are a few areas in Sycamore Canyon, about 10 miles west of Sedona, where the Redwall is exposed but I am almost positive there are no exposures in the Sedona area. Huge cliffs of Redwall Limestone can be found in the Mingus Mtns. about 20 miles SW of Sedona. The Schnebly Hill Formation is quite a bit younger than the Redwall Limestone, the Schnebly Hill is of Permian age while the Redwall was deposited during the Mississippian period. The Schnebly Hill is unique to the Sedona Area, I believe that Sedona is the only area where that layer is exposed in Northern Arizona. It pinches out just north of Sedona in Oak Creek Canyon and is not even found at the Grand Canyon.

This being said, I am not a professional geologist. I do have a long-standing interest in geology and I have taken several field trips with geologists from the USGS to the Sedona area and have read several books regarding the geology of this area. I hope I explained this clearly enough!-Nebular110 16:14, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bell Rock

Why no image of Bell Rock? Fred Bauder 20:42, 29 July 2006 (UTC) (This edit was just for fun while showing someone from Sedona the article)[reply]

Have a look at Village of Oak Creek, Arizona. Cheers, Pete Tillman 19:55, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Overdevelopment

I just visited Sedona for the first time. While being stunned by the geology and scenery, I was also saddened by the degree to which the developed town has sprawled over what seems to be nearly every flat surface at the foot of the beautiful red cliffs. Surely the aesthetic damage done by suburban style houses and expensive resorts ought to be part of any responsible discussion of the town and region of Sedona. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Melampous (talk • contribs) 22:10, December 25, 2006

If you can find a source backing up your claims feel free to add it to the page, but please cite your source. BJ^Talk 06:18, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you. I drove the length of 89-A this summer and Sedona was the only place on that road that I really disliked. I was like...wow...east coast congestion again. Cazort (talk) 01:38, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sedona Development

The issue with the Sedona development is an increasing one. However, without the development of resorts, hotels, roads and such, tourist would crowd the town. Most of the developments that have been made around Sedona are to benefit the locals. The locals need the roads and the expansion because of the rapid increase in tourist traffic. This is a natural increase that can't be stopped. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.164.196.100 (talk) 20:32, 7 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

To say you can't stop development is silly. Communities can do lots of stuff with zoning and other laws to constrain or guide development. Look at North Royalton, OH as an example. They decided they'd rather preserve the unique rural character of their community rather than grow with faceless subdivisions like their neighbors in Strongsville, OH. Look at an aerial photograph to see the difference. Cazort (talk) 01:35, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When Sedona incorporated in 1988, the city government inherited zoning codes from the two counties. The city instituted a Community Plan per state law, but the plan often conflicts with the existing zoning codes. Nevertheless, development is governed by a combination of the codes and the Sedona Community Plan. Residential and commercial development is roughly 80 percent built-out,according to city documents. --Cyndy Hardy (talk) 16:14, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation

Editor Mjtrayner believes that a cross-reference to the Kia Sedona automobile is a "Kia Motors (car company) advertisment which has absolutely nothing to do with Sedona AZ"

The cross-reference is here because the main entry for this model is the Kia Carnival, its name outside the USA & Canada. Not even remotely an advertisement. I've restored the link. Pete Tillman 20:06, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Wondering how to edit this U.S. City Entry?
The WikiProject U.S. Cities standards might help.

32.2% of all households are made up of individuals

The other 67.8%, of course, are made up of Borg. -- SS 19:40, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia is sorely lacking in this kind concisely-hilarious esoteric-talk-page exchange. Wish I knew how to find more of this Scyllagist (talk) 12:32, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sedona Skatefest dead?

We have this listed as an annual event, but Google can find no mention of a 2007 or 2008 event (last was 2006). Is it dead? Thanks, Pete Tillman (talk) 18:59, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know there was one in 2007, in the early summer I think.12.164.197.120 (talk) 15:40, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Paranormal matters

This area is known for some bizarre paranormal matters, such as UFOs and contact with bizarre creatures and even aliens. Google "Sedona, Arizona/Paranormal matters", related matters. 65.173.104.93 (talk) 02:08, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Celebrity Visitors

Why is this even enumerated? A million freakin' celebrities have been to Cleveland. The Cleveland, Ohio page doesn't have a list of celebrities who have visited it. Why is this important? Sure, ones who have lived here -maybe- but pretty much every other city only has people who were born or raised there. I'm gonna go add to the Denver, CO page now that Bernie Kosar visited the city several times in the 1980s. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.49.157.67 (talk) 19:40, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree. I have removed the irrelevant celebrity 'visitors'. I have also trimmed the other irrelevant information and non notables per Wikipedia:Famous Residents and to keep them in line with these sections in other articles. People can click the names and read if they want more information but when these people were born and what they did is not relevant to the subject of this article itself. Mfield (talk) 22:38, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sedona at sunset

Sunset? In the photo, the sky is light blue and the shadows are at a 45 degree angle. I'd say it's more like "Sedona at mid-afternoon." GeneCallahan (talk) 21:17, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Heh. That's really Bell Rock, in the VOC, and not really that good a photo. I subbed in the classic Sedona view. Better? Cheers, Pete Tillman (talk) 01:59, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notable Residents

As per WP:Famous Residents I've removed the Notable Residents sections. Of the people listed, all failed to meet the Famous Residents policy criteria. Specifically:

"The person must be or must have been a true resident of the location itself; not a seasonal resident; not a resident of a nearby locale or community. Such residence must be verifiable through cited, reliable sources."

and

"The person's notability must derive from the location OR the person must have derived the basis for their notability in that location OR the person must hold some significance to the location in general."

I'm certainly willing to entertain a discussion, but I thought I'd give WP:Be bold a shot. :) Cory Donnelly (talk) 13:59, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. WP:Famous Residents isn't policy -- it's just an essay. That said, the list could use trimming. But it's silly to require " true residence" (whatever that means) in a resort town. -- Pete Tillman (talk) 02:42, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced 2010 census data in Infobox

I've deleted the incomplete, malformed source given as the "population reference" in the {{Infobox settlement}} for this article. Here's what was there:

<ref name="2010Census">{{cite web|url=http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=DEC_10_DP_G001&prodType=table=[[United States Census Bureau]]|date=2010-04-01|accessdate=2011-08-02}}</ref>

and here's what it replaced, from the 2007 census, in a 15:36, 2 August 2011 (UTC) edit:

<ref name="2007popest">{{cite web|url=http://www.census.gov/popest/cities/tables/SUB-EST2007-04-04.csv|title=Annual Estimates of the Population for Incorporated Places in Arizona|publisher=[[United States Census Bureau]]|date=2008-07-10|accessdate=2008-07-14}}</ref>

It looks to me like the editor didn't copy the entire URL and accidentally overwrote the "title" and part of the "publisher" arguments for the {{cite web}} template, rather than updating them. The result is a big, red, broken-reference error in the References section of this article. I attempted to divine the information from the newly cited Census Bureau website, but it's a typical inscrutable Federal database that's friendlier to professional researchers (and probably hackers) than to ordinary mortals who expect common web interfaces. So I left in the updated data but fact-tagged it.

Besides asking for the community to dig up a working source for this information, I ask every editor to PLEASE preview your edits before your save. It takes a few extra seconds, but it often saves you the embarrassment and everyone else plenty of headaches trying to fix things. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 02:56, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sedona The Movie

The whole "Sedona: The Movie" section and the link at the bottom were clearly only added for self-promotion and do not belong in an encyclopedic article on Sedona. Shouldn't this be removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.89.181.105 (talk) 11:23, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cinematic legacy copyvio

Much of cinematic legacy section -- which was tonally inappropriate anyway -- was copypasted from the book https://books.google.ca/books?id=dNhLCAAAQBAJ&pg=PT194&lpg=PT194&dq=a+Sedona+connection+that+has+eluded+historians+since+the+film+was+made&source=bl&ots=_f_ZWorNnj&sig=S4kNTRQeyRzPxUCogTKkkkeHxPc&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjw16Hf9qTKAhWKOD4KHb4jBiIQ6AEIITAB#v=onepage&q=a%20Sedona%20connection%20that%20has%20eluded%20historians%20since%20the%20film%20was%20made&f=false Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:48, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nice catch Shawn in Montreal. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:53, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, yes I see it's been there for a while. That whole section was so... written. It's just didn't sound like user generated neutral prose so when I Googled a particularly NPOV phrase, there it all was. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:11, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Adding travelogue-style info

24.121.25.164 (talk · contribs), As I stated on your talk page, I reverted your change at Sedona, Arizona, as it does not meet Wikipedia requirements. Specifically, all wording must be in a neutral tone, without adding words of praise or other value-laden wording. More importantly, Wikipedia is not a travel guide; descriptions of activities and sights are to be sharply limited. --Larry/Traveling_Man (talk) 18:08, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Sedona, 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: 5 June 2024).

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) 11:12, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sedona

Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Yes, there are a lot of specific dates, information and sources on the Sedona, Arizona discussion.Each section is broken up into small parts and cited.

Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? This information is coming from actual facts. They are not someones bias views or opinions. There are actual dates, heights, rocks and so on that are actually a part of Sedona, AZ. A lot of the information comes from books or news articles.

JLHustead124 (talk) 05:00, 7 September 2017 (UTC) Jessica H.[reply]

The "vortex"

This term (with quotes) is mentioned twice in one of the picture captions (the one for the File:Vortex panoramicview sedona.jpg) but there is no other use of the term in the article that I could find. It should either be in the article , or removed from the caption, I think. (the caption seems taken verbatim or close to it from the caption on the image, and there is mention of "vortices" in the cultural section of the article but it all seems not very well hung together to me) ++Lar: t/c 17:59, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

History of New Age development

I was hoping to learn from this page about how it is that Sedona developed the new age/spiritual vortex tourist industry it is (in)famous for. But besides a mention of the harmonic convergence movement of 1987 there is little info here. ScottMainwaring (talk) 16:09, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

There is grammatical difficulties in the sentence:"Racing video game Forza ....are appears fictional track Sedona Raceway Park" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boutarfa Nafia (talk • contribs) 13:49, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Contradictory areas listed

The area of Sedona, Arizona, is listed one way in the body of the article and another in the header of the article. There is currently a discrepancy of about 1 square mile between the two, but seeing as how the article's body cites the U.S. Census Bureau with its information, it is especially confusing that the area is listed differently at the top of the article. It seems very ambiguous where the header got its area measurement from. 24.56.243.156 (talk) 20:16, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]