User talk:Noroton

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Useful templates 1.1 Dates of birth and death 2 See also 3 Useful pages 4 Welcome 5 Norwalk, CT 6 Demographics 7 Notes 8 Format change on botted pages 9 Henri Rousseau 10 Famous people in Wilton 11 Sorry about the edit 12 Declaration of Independence 13 Blueberry 14 Guicciardini 15 Many thanks 16 Ridgefield and Redding 17 Still much to learn... 18 Onward and upward 19 On the subject 20 Georgetown post office 21 Derogatory Article. 22 pre-Iraq War comments 23 Pre-Iraq War -- changing to Neutral 24 Pre Iraq war 25 Help 26 Great Captain Island/Light? 27 Talk: Bow ties 28 History of Norwalk, Connecticut 29 Name-holders 30 You have me confused? 31 wrong William Charles 32 links to 'years in' (prizes)

[edit] Useful templates

[edit] Dates of birth and death

• Charles Darwin (12 February 1809–19 April 1882)
  • Locations should be included in the biography portion of the body article. For example, "(12 February 1809 in Shrewsbury, Shropshire, England–19 April 1882 in Downe, Kent, England)" should be separated to "(12 February 1809–19 April 1882) … He was born in Shrewsbury, Shropshire, England … He died in Downe, Kent, England".
• Socrates (470–399 BC) (or "BCE")
  • When only the years are known.
• Serena Williams (born September 26, 1981)
  • For a person still living at the time the article was written.

• Made In Stamford - A History of Stamford as a Manufacturing Center. Made In Stamford. Retrieved on September 6, 2005.

Wikipedia:Citing sources/example style

Wikipedia:Citation templates

1. REDIRECT Sheffield Island Light

For galleries: <..gallery..>

Image:immediately type in address|caption <../gallery..>

2005 Gerald Stern
2004 Mark Strand
2003 Richard Wilbur

[edit] See also

• Alan Dershowitz: Bulger controversies

User:Noroton/American Academy of Arts and Letters Gold Medals

User:Noroton/poetry award listings

User:Noroton/Iraq consensus notes

User:Noroton/Scandal article thoughts

[edit] Useful pages

• Wikipedia:Manual of Style
• WP:ESL
• WP:G
• MoS:DP

[edit] Welcome

Hello Noroton and welcome to Wikipedia! I'm glad you've chosen to join us. This is a great project with lots of dedicated people, which might seem intimidating at times, but don't let anything discourage you. Be bold!, explore, and contribute. Try to be civil by following simple guidelines and signing your talk comments with ~~~~ but never forget that one of our central tenets is to ignore all rules.

If you want to learn more, Wikipedia:Tutorial is the place to go, but eventually the following links might also come in handy:
Help
FAQ
Glossary
Manual of Style

Float around until you find something that tickles your fancy. One easy way to do this is to hit the random page button in the navigation bar to the left. Additionally, the Community Portal offers a more structured way to become acquainted with the many great committees and groups that focus on specific tasks. My personal favorite stomping grounds are Wikipedia:Translation into English as well as the cleanup, welcoming, and counter-vandalism committees. Finally, the Wikimedia Foundation has several other wiki projects that you might enjoy. If you have any more questions, always feel free to ask me anything on my talk page. Again, welcome! -- Draeco 05:12, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Norwalk, CT

Hi, and thanks for your contributions to the Norwalk, Connecticut article. My only worry is that with all the external links, and not even explanations outside of the titles, the article is becoming a bit too much like a web directory. Could you possibly flesh out your recent additions, and remove the redunant links (e.g., lockwood mansion...). Thanks! TJ0513 02:08, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Demographics

Thanks for adding so much information about Connecticut. I did, however, have one concern. You keep moving town demographics to the bottom of the page. This is in direct conflict with wiki style. In an article about a town or city, demographics should be prominently placed near the top of the page. I just wanted to bring this to your attention, and your other edits are fine. Jagvar 19:31, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

• I'm a Darien resident too and when I started editing the Darien article in January of last year, the style was explained to me by other users as follows: a town's history, geography and demographics should be placed at the top of the article. Any supplementary town information should follow, and last of all, links. You can take a look at the articles on Danbury, Connecticut, Bridgeport, Connecticut and Litchfield, Connecticut for ideas. Jagvar 14:18, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Notes

From bots page

Provides a good template of pre-formatted data for contributors (see how the Newton, Massachusetts entry has been expanded; the Periodic table was used to start the 100+ articles for the elements)

[edit] Format change on botted pages

First off, thanks for the question, but let me preface my comments by saying I'm on vacation in Thailand away from my comfort zone and don't really have time to give you a thorough answer. When I return home on the 15th, I'll try to do your question justice. First off, I would remind you to be bold, because the best way to solve problems can be to make waves and cause a discussion. I see no problem with adding a section of interesting facts to the article. Actually moving the Demographics section could be a little more problematic, since one of the nice things about bots is the uniform style they create. There's something to be said for that, and WP:BOTS does the saying. On the other hand, by adding your more personalized info, you're overcoming one of the bot shortcomings -- that botted pages are soulless and may never see a human edit. I added a few trifling facts to the arctile on my hometown of Burkesville, Kentucky, but as you'll see they were just plugged into the Geography section where they were appropriate. WP:MOS is the clearinghouse for style guidelines, but I don't have time to pore over that tome right now. Keep up the good fight and I'll talk to you about the 15th. - Draeco 11:24, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Henri Rousseau

Nice work. Check out footnote coding. [1] Tyrenius 05:45, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

There's a lot to learn! This explains it Wikipedia:Footnotes. Some pages I've found helpful are here. Let me know if you need any assistance. Tyrenius 20:27, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Famous people in Wilton

Got your message: I actually don't doubt any of the names on that list, in the sense that I think that it's not true. The general Wikipedia policy, however, is all about Verifiability -- and putting up warning messages when we're not 100% sure that a book, newspaper, or other credible source hasn't already said what we're saying. Your suggestion, "to keep an eye out for references in the press or other evidence," is exactly the right thing to do. If you have a web URL, just surround it in [] marks and plop it right next to the statement. If you want to learn the fancier ways to do it, check out Wikipedia:Citing sources. Thanks for asking, and thanks for helping build up the Connecticut articles. --M@rēino 03:10, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry about the edit

I could of sworn it was called the Stamford Advocate, until I checked their website. I corrected the article soon after changing it. I'll remember to check the facts before editing first. Again I am sorry for any problem I might have caused. --thinkpad 19:19, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Declaration of Independence

Hi Norton. I think your addition of these pictures is great, and the link to the website that identifies the people is interesting as well. However, you can't really recognize many personal features no matter how big this image is, and besides for cosmetic reasons, the image needs to match the scale of the other images. The caption should also be concise and to the point. The article is about the person, not the painting, the painter or even the Declaration of Independence. Also, regarding the Delaware folks, Rodney was not even there, Dickinson was strongly against it and says he was hiding in the back somewhere, and Read did not vote for it either, although he eventually signed. So I would really ask that the display be at 300px and the caption limited to a line or two at the most. Perhaps you could do an article on the painting itself, with an enlarged version and the label could provide a link to that article for all the detailed information. Please give it some thought. stilltim 00:46, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Blueberry

Nice additions; couple of requests - could you convert the new refs you've added to the same style as the existing ones (Harvard style) so the refs list is consistent (I don't have a post-doc degree in computing so don't know how to work those < ref > tags), and please avoid adding too many headers for the length of the page! I'm also a little dubious about having all those commercial ext links to grower associations, they're a bit close to spamlinks - thanks, MPF 09:08, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Noroton - thanks for the details; I'll go through (probably tomorrow) and see what I can work out on which refs belong where (some of them are mine, but not all). I know the numbered refs look nice on the page, but I'm a firm believer in wiki editing access to everyone - and if I've been here for over 2½ years and still can't fathom out how to work them, I hate to think how daunting they must be for new editors without a lot of computing experience. Paragraph length I guess is a matter of individual preference, my own personal feeling is that roundabout 20 lines per header looks best, otherwise, the TOC gets to be too big. For ext links, there's a general feeling that they only go in if providing reference for something in the article, rather than a general link farm; there's some fairly extensive guidelines at WP:EL and WP:NOT, have a look through there and see what you think (after reading through them I usually end up deleting, rather than keeping, ext links!). Thanks again! - MPF 21:46, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Guicciardini

Your contribs are interesting: Connecticut, Connecticut, Connecticut, Connecticut, Connecticut, Guicciardini, Connecticut, Connecticut... whoops, how did that get in there?! No seriously -- nice article :) I'm reading his Storia d'Italia for a seminar, nice to get a little background on the guy. --Bookgrrl 17:33, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Many thanks

Hello, Noroton.

While editing pages is so easy on Wikipedia, I still have not figured out how to simply "respond" to a "message." So I will post this note on your page. Perhaps this is the proper way.

I have long suspected that the Robert Fitzgerald-Flannery O'Connor connection to Ridgefield was postal only. Several people have asked me about this over the years. Finally, when I saw what was online here, I went to the town clerk's office, and confirmed that Robert S. Fitzgerald never owned property here (a Robert H. Fitzgerald had land a short distance from Redding in 1948). Then I checked out own newspaper files (I have been editor of the Ridgefield newspaper for more than 35 years), and found a brief, old reference to Robert Fitzgerald, saying he lived in Redding. Our staff at our Redding newspaper checked their files and found that, indeed, he had lived there. They had stories about him from the 50s and 60s and from 2000. His home was not far from the Ridgefield town line and besides getting his mail from the Ridgefield post office, he probably also did much of his shopping in Ridgefield. However, he paid his taxes in Redding, and voted there.

Thank you for your kind words. I am in the throes of trying to update Ridgefield Names, which has grown into a 200,000 word monstrosity. But I enjoy it nonetheless.

I see that you are involved in providing information on many area communities. You are doing a wonderful service.

I have expanded on the Keeler Tavern, Aldrich Museum, and added the Ridgefield Playhouse to the Attractions, Landmarks, and Institutions. I also plan to add a section on Geology -- which is pretty interesting here.

I am wondering about your source for "Of the families to settle in Ridgefield, the Rockwells and Lounsburys owned approximately one third of the land in Ridgefield by 1900." I have never heard this, and have much trouble believing it. That would mean they owned more than 11 square miles -- over 7,000 acres. That's nearly the size of the whole town of Darien. Jack Sanders 23:35, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ridgefield and Redding

Greetings again. You might be interested to know that I knew Betty Boyd for many years. In fact, she was my boss. Betty Boyd -- or as we knew her -- Betty Grace Boyd Nash -- married Karl S. Nash, publisher of The Ridgefield Press (and eventually, The Redding Pilot). She was the longtime managing editor of those and other papers (that today include the Darien Times). Betty Grace was the daughter of Thomas Boyd, whose World War I novel, Through the Wheat, has been called one of the best portraits of war ever written. She died several years ago. I am not sure she ever knew about the O'Connor reference. For many, many years, she used the "personals" section of the classified ads in her own papers the way we use e-mail today. She would send messages to all sorts of family and friends who she knew read the paper. In 1949, she may have been courting Karl Nash -- or vice versa -- and the ad writer may well have been Karl. A few days ago, I did put a footnote on the Fitzgerald page and changed O'Connor. Guess I better put a footnote on O'Connor, too, as you suggest. I better get rid of that Rockwell/Lounsbury reference. It's just not possible. (In doing Ridgefield Names, I read every single deed filed in the town clerk's office from 1708 to 1900, and recall no sense of vast Lounsbury/Rockwell land ownership. And there is nothing in the local histories that would indicate such.) Thanks and best wishes. Jack Sanders 14:38, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Still much to learn...

Hi I am having a bit of a problem creating a new page on Branchville, and then linking it. I created the page, but probably did it incorrectly. The address is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Branchville%2C_Connecticut, but I think it should have the Connecticut in parentheses. Did not know how to do that -- unless it's simply to put the name in parentheses in the title! Will fiddle with it a tad. Many thanks for your observations and help!Jack Sanders 16:32, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Onward and upward

Figured out Branchville finally, and all seems well. I believe you are responsible for Georgetown, so you might enjoy the map I upoaded (my first experiment in dealing with images -- basically, I copied the coding you had done on the Ridgefield page). I also made a couple of modifications with respect to Ridgefield's relation to Georgetown, and footnoted the information.—Jack Sanders 18:33, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] On the subject

You took out a Trump picture from People of Greenwich, Connecticut, saying it wasn't on topic. You can't get more on topic than that. I'm restoring it. And that wasn't "commentary" in the caption, either.Noroton 16:44, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Commentary is anything that can be considered NPOV. What if I thought he was having a particularly good hair day? I would have a difference in opinion with something you are presenting as "fact". Fair use images should not be used in articles not about the creator of the fair use image (Trump Productions LLC/Mark Burnett Productions/NBC/Universal Music & Video Distribution), or an article dealing in depth with the subject of the image. Lists don't deal in depth. Saavy? -- Zanimum 17:03, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I've just been reading up on the Fair Use page. The people article is not in depth, so you're right, it isn't fair use. I'll be removing some other pics there too. As for "bad hair day" that's fact, not opinion. You shouldn't try to be so literal on the policy.Noroton 17:11, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the images off. No, trust me, I'm not being too literal of the NPOV policy, although I do appreciate humor. Ask on the Wikipedia:Help desk for a second opinion, if you wish. -- Zanimum 17:22, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm a little upset. I'm killing off my babies on each of the "People in" pages I've created. It's a slaughterhouse.Noroton 17:25, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

It's okay, I'm sure I'd be too. However, there are some other people you could add into the article. The articles on Clyde Fitch, Roger Glover and Regis Philbin include free images you could use, plus there's a free image of Mel Gibson, if you don't mind embaressing Greenwich with the pic. -- Zanimum 17:51, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Georgetown post office

Greetings again! Georgetown post office no longer actually delivers mail. P.O. boxes and window service only. And back in the 1950s, when Georgetown did deliver, Ridgefield residents in the Branchville section voted not to get their mail from Georgetown, but from Ridgefield. Old Connecticut loyalties, I guess. The odd thing is, the town of Redding has FOUR post offices for about 9,000 people: Redding, West Redding, Redding Ridge, and Georgetown. Ridgefield, population 23,000, has one post office, and it's the world's worst.

[edit] Derogatory Article.

The article you made concerning Norwalk's education system is very derogatory and makes me feel very unfortunate indeed. What is your aim? Gentlyfloatingabout 19:28, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Nothing will suddenly be done if someone, possibly an important official, sees that article. Norwalk just doesn't have the funding from the taxes it receives. It is not as rich as the surrounding towns. And it is very sad, especially since that there is nothing that may be done. Gentlyfloatingabout 01:28, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm being REALISTIC when I say that Norwalk does not have the funding! Gentlyfloatingabout 21:17, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] pre-Iraq War comments

I voted for Rename and Cleanup for yout pre-Iraq War opinions on Saddam Hussein. I think that the article should definitely exist whether or not this carnation of it is deleted, but I think you need to go back and thoroughly get all major opinions on the matter. This is a topic fraught with controversy, so you need to be prepared to be completely neutral not only in writing style, but in content. Anyway, Good Luck with it! Joshdboz 11:24, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Agree with Joshdboz's comments. This is a very hot political topic, so you have to be super-scrupulous about NPOV. Whether a separate article is needed is also questionable, in my view. The material is interesting and valuable, but might be better used in already existing articles about the leadup to the Iraq war. Also, I'm glad your category on conservatives was retained. I never did understand the delete position on that category. Casey Abell 13:39, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pre-Iraq War -- changing to Neutral

I think that your latest efforts at improving the article present a good-faith effort at removing POV issues. There is a lot that still needs to be done, however, in terms of its structure. I will see if I can work on it a little more over the next few days. In the meantime, I am changing my vote on the article to Neutral and will see if we can reach a common ground. Andrew Levine 18:15, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pre Iraq war

Im very busy with other articles ive been working on. But my opinion is that this should be put under the Saddam Husseinarticle. But if not then it defitnley needs to be renamed. How about Opinions on Iraq War or go to the Iraq Warpage. CMB. --Zonerocks 15:35, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Help

You could help me if you want with other articles. I am currently working on the Reconstruction and The Changing SouthIf you could make internal links with the words in the article, I would really appriciate it. This is a really good article which could become an featured article someday. --Zonerocks 15:35, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

thanks, appriciate it. Saved me alot of time. Better get back to fixing this article. --Zonerocks 20:57, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Great Captain Island/Light?

I like it! The second picture was too big so I made it a little smaller. I dont think that 2 pictures make it crowded, if we get more pictures, we can just make a gallery. Thanks for expanding the history. --Digon3 14:51, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Talk: Bow ties

I can't believe I just waded into that discussion. Thanks for bringing it to my attention, though. Johndodd 01:27, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Ditto for me, but thanks for the head's up. It was possibly the most well-discussed merger of trival stuff ever, but I was glad to be part of it. Cornell Rockey

I think that if all names are on the list, with a summary on the article page, with all the photos in the gallery remaining on the article page, that will work. As I have said before, I particularly like the photo gallery of bow tie wearers. Doc ♬ talk 02:58, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] History of Norwalk, Connecticut

Hi; I've endorsed this revision of this page. Note that I don't have a particularly strong feeling one way or another; I simply made a call and there it is. I don't assert any particular authority to freeze the page at any moment. Indeed, I'm sure this article can be further improved. I just have to question whether you two can do so, right at the moment. Please lend me your ears for a bit while I comment.

Noroton (talk • contribs) and TJ0513 (talk • contribs), you seem to be in the middle of an edit war. Page history does not indicate any blatant 3RR violation and, if you think you're not edit warring, this is probably why. Let me just suggest that edit wars come in all shapes and sizes; 3RR only forbids one particular kind. Other edit wars are also frowned upon and occasionally grounds for sanctions. The general principle is discuss, don't revert. This theme runs through many of our policies.

My suggestion is that you both take a break from this particular page. I don't particularly care if my edit stands or if the very next editor who comes along reverts it -- just so long as it's not one of you guys. Let a few other guys get in their licks; see which way the wind blows. You may be surprised at what the rest of the community has to say. Give it a month. Remember, all versions are safely stored in page history; there is no emergency, nothing will be lost. You've both commented on talk extensively so other editors will be aware of the controversy. No problem!

There are many outstanding tasks around here; no shortage of work to be done. Build up some good karma and I'm wiling to bet that in a month from now, you'll both find your concerns fully addressed. If there's any way I can possibly help, just ask.

I'd like to repeat that I'm totally uninvolved in this issue; I've never even been to Connecticut, despite having lived many years in the Rust Belt. I don't even particularly worry that the project will fall down if you fight over this article. But I hope I'm able to help preserve two valuable contributors to the project; this I care about a great deal. Thank you. John Reid 08:12, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Name-holders

Name-holders are people who hold a name. If you clicked on the primary link in the Alexander (disambiguation) page which was mentioned in the name-holders sentence, the context might have been clearer. Please stop cluttering the disambiguation page with stuff that is available in the base name article. -- JHunterJ 21:10, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] You have me confused?

Um, while you are welcome for the note, I do not remember ever having come in contact with you :). I did, however, check through my contributions (Yay for "last 5000 contributions" button) and I can find no mention of your name. Where exactly is this note? GofG _|^|_| Contribs 02:07, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] wrong William Charles

Hi! Thanks for your note at Wikipedia:Canadian wikipedians' notice board/Dictionary of Canadian Biography/C re: William Charles. I have disambiguated to William Charles (fur trader) and added a proper link there. Thanks again. --Stormbay 03:25, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] links to 'years in' (prizes)

might be easier just to put one link to years in poetry/lit in the see also, and maybe mention it at top? i had assumed those links were to the general year things. these also might usefull to viewers to get idea of the hist. context. both of course shld have links to each other, i guess what is 1st linked from the dates on the prizes shld be the 'most likely to be wanted'. which wld this be? → bsnowball 14:44, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
sorry, though i had replied earlier. i hadn't thought that thru enough. as yet no usefull thoughts except, tenuously, this looks like a lot of reduplication, might there short cuts like w/ transclusion? random idea, i'll have to think about it. otherwise suspect the 'years in' pages only need the really big prizes, & why can't the poetry go in the years in lit? if that doesn't get to big i assume that wld be better all round. → bsnowball 17:53, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
guess it's been almost a week & it doesn't look like there's any concerted opposition :) do you also agree it wld be the List of poetry awards? can do that this evening. (next few hrs) no more thoughts on the years, although i do lean towards having them both under lit. maybe input from the Wikipedia:WikiProject Literature[i meant to say Wikipedia:WikiProject Poetry!]wld be useful. ps the list of mothers & fathers is great, tempted to add mary & god or god & god just to see how long it takes... → bsnowball 08:15, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

the merge is done, fairly sure i got it all. for now i moved the non-english with it, can decide on that now i suppose (there's acctually very little of them). yes, i'm aust. agree about that (don't need sep. oz prizes, & yes, small enough to go on 'year in lit pages', one day i'll get around to a real oz po page...) otherwise i guess yr judgement is better on the years in as yr the one doing all the work.  ⇒ bsnowball  11:34, 14 November 2006 (UTC)