Talk:New Canaan, Connecticut

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is supported by WikiProject Cities, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to cities, towns, and various other settlements on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale.


WikiProject Connecticut
 This article is part of WikiProject Connecticut, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Connecticut, United States on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Some edits

I deleted a couple of the changes made by Nationalparks for the following reasons: Is the John O'Leary comment really of sufficient interest to include here? Or am I underestimating the significance of being a "presidential scholar?" --Feitclub 21:37, Sep 25, 2004 (UTC)

Nope, I deleted it. It was actually in the official report New Canaan publishes about its school system though, so that's why I put it there.--Alex Krupp 22:07, Sep 25, 2004 (UTC)

a) Nationalparks asserted that Brian Williams is a well-known person who lives in New Canaan. This may or may not be true, but either way I think it is a violation of Mr. Williams privacy unless he makes this information public on his personal homepage or elsewhere on the Internet. Wikipedia is not a celebrity gossip website. Alex Krupp 22:45, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

A) If you Google [Brian Williams Canaan] you'll see that there are numerous (apparently authorized) profiles of him which mention that he lives in New Canaan. Lots of articles on town have "notable residents" sections.
B) Just because a piece of data has been listed does not preclude us from giving the significance of that data. "Affluent" is not a POV, it's a fact.
C)Therefore, I'm going to restore both pieces of information. (Also, please don't put usernames in talk page headings- it puts excess focus on the editor rather than the edits. Thanks.) -Willmcw 23:03, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
That's fine. But why Darien and not Greenwich? Greenwich is much wealthier than either New Canaan or Darien. Alex Krupp 20:03, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 67.86.80.223 edit

b) I deleted the comment about New Canaan being one of the most affluent communities because the per capita income is already listed, so calling it affluent is unnecessary POV. Alex Krupp 22:45, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

I didn't write this, so I have separated the sections. Nationalparks 22:51, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Comments on the 12/16/05 edits

  • Only notable businesses should be included.
  • Only people widely known to the general public should be included in the list of notable people.
  • All facts must be sourced.

[edit] People

Many other people live in New Canaan, such as

Larry Ellison, L. Paul Bremer, Michael Jackson, Rosemary Klenk, David Letterman, Regis Philbin, Donald Trump, J. Krishna


and so on..........


  • Research Please!

I know for a fact that Michael Jackson does not live in New Canaan. It's true that he stayed briefly at Silver Hill Hospital and that caused a media sensation, but I wouldn't classify him as a notable "citizen" of New Canaan. Regis Philbin and Donald Trump??? I'm sorry, but not true. Also, who is the CEO of softsoap? Is that some sort of big mystery? Deputydog23 19:23, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Conservative

I am a conservative who grew in NC who does not want people to think Ms, Coulter is representative of local thought. Evidnetly others want the article to reflect that misconception —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.9.141.171 (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia is supposed to be NPOV, that's why I've been removing the POV you have been adding. Nationalparks 15:04, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Coulter is a whacko. Why pretend otherwise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.9.141.171 (talk • contribs)

[edit] The Demographics Section

The demographics section is maintained by a bot, and I'm not sure if moving it to the bottom will affect the bot's ability to maintain the section or not. Does anyone know anything about this, or should we move it back just to be safe? Alex Krupp 03:19, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I've been looking into this and can't find anything that suggests the position of demographics affects the bot at all. It was added by "rambot" which is operated by "RamMan" and I've asked him about it. But if it were a problem to move it, then wouldn't that have been mentioned somewhere in Wikipedia? I don't think it's something worth worrying about, but I'm hoping to get a response from RamMan.Noroton 04:05, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] UPDATE

Here's a copy of the question I put to Ram-Man (who created the rambot, which created the demographics and geography sections) and his answer (and someone else's). He indicates it has no effect on the bot and he gives no objection.Noroton 00:27, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Does it matter where in an article the "Demographics" and "Geography" sections go?

Does it matter to the bot (that is, does it affect how well it works)? Does it matter to you -- that is, do you care, personally? Should there be a Wikipedia style rule or recommendation to keep them in a certain spot in each article that rambot creates? I ask all this because I've been moving these sections lower down on the page in the articles for several towns and cities in Fairfield County, Connecticut (see Darien, Connecticut for example). But now I'm being told that it's "Wikipedia style" to keep them up top. There's no such official style that I can find, and if there is going to be a universal "style" or even tradition, it seems to me that those sections should appear low in the article because other, less dry and more interesting sections are better left up top. If you agree with that, or even if you don't care, that helps my position. If you disagree, well, I'd still like to know. So ... whaddaya think? And thanks for creating rambot.Noroton 01:42, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Can't speak for the Ram-Man or Rambot, but personally I find those sections rather dry and think they ought to be at the bottom, just ahead of Refs, Exts, etc. If the article gets long, they're in the TOC for those who need to look up a fact. Now if there is some compelling or unique item in the demographics, or geography, then I'd have no problem with it earlier. But in that case it might be better to have that fact in its own section. Just my USD0.02.--J Clear 20:22, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
I won't be moving them, so if someone else reformats, I will leave the current ordering. The bot isn't intended to make those kinds of decisions, but to leave as much of the status quo in place. Ram-Man 11:50, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ram-Man&action=edit&section=4

[edit] Education Section

I think the school info (SATs, college admittance) should, if not deleted entirely, be spun off into a school section. I'm not from the area, so don't think it approprite to tackle.Hillsboro 16:48, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Whatever happens to these statistics, they will need to be referenced. Nationalparks 17:44, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
They come from the New Canaan public schools website, which is currently linked to by the article. Alex Krupp 19:07, 2 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Robert Gordon, former resident but notable?

After doing a Google search I deleted this recent addition to the Notable People section:

Robert ("Bob") Gordon, former Head Editor for Time-Life & VP incharge of advertising,- former resident

My mind is open if a case can be made to keep him in, but as of now I just don't see it. Perhaps this is one of the Robert Gordons out there who wrote some interesting books, or perhaps he did something to make him notable. If the claim to notability is simply the position of a person in a company, then my feeling is that the person should be CEO and the company should be well known (Time-Life is such a well known division that I think it would qualify if the CEO lived in New Canaan, but that's just my opinion). I think the least notable person on the New Canaan list is the head of Morton's Steakhouse chain and we probably shouldn't have someone on the list who's less notable than that. Just my thoughts.Noroton 19:25, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

The head editor of a magazine is essentially the CEO. I think being editor of Time-Life is notable since it was a huge cultural icon in the past, even though Time today is IMHO a trashy tabloid dedicated to pimping the iPod and other trendy crap. However, I agree that the fact that he was in charge of advertising is non-notable. Alex Krupp 20:30, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Harvard Five

Some of the information in the Harvard Five section of this New Canaan page is also in a page that we have added called the Harvard Five. Should we consolidate these two pages or does it belong in both places? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bri&Suz (talk • contribs) 17:37, 1 May 2007 (UTC).