User talk:Noroton

Useful templates

• "Made In Stamford - A History of Stamford as a Manufacturing Center". Made In Stamford. Retrieved September 6. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help); Unknown parameter |accessyear= ignored (|access-date= suggested) (help)

Wikipedia:Citing sources/example style

Wikipedia:Citation templates

See also

• Alan Dershowitz: Bulger controversies

Useful pages

Wikipedia:Manual of Style

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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.

Farber

Great job expanding the Barry Farber article. It was diverse enough to need more organization. Joshdboz 15:13, 18 September 2006 (UTC)