Talk:Cheshire, Connecticut

Cheshire Academy has history on line at Cheshire Academy. Founded as Episcopal Academy of Connecticut in 1794. There's a lot of interesting stuff there, but I'm not sure how much belongs in an article on Cheshire.

I think the Geographic information has relevance; I'm not sure why it wasn't included. Most of that Census stuff is in almost every town wiki article. Admittedly not the greatest prose, but it doesn't qualify as clutter, imo.--BradPatrick 23:59, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I'd watch much of what is written in the cultural area of this town's page; I moved here several years ago and noticed that its citizens tend to believe the town is much more significant than it really is in order to satisfy their egos. Hence Cheshire High's GREAT extracurriculars, nevermind that I went to said high school and realized the extracurriculars only appealed to those who didn't have to work. It's a beautiful town and a great place to live, but many of its people, such as those who would bother to change its wiki page, are full of themselves a bit too much. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.9.136.175 (talk) 09:00, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Removal of Tim White Listens

Tim White's Blog is a valid external link. The blog is a hub of online discussion for the residents of Cheshire. To the best of my knowledge it is the largest online community devoted to the township, and it hosts a wealth of town-related information. It is run by Councilman Tim White, but it's a neutral discussion ground with 30+ comments for many posts.

Also, no reason has been provided for the removal of the link.Craig Houghton 04:28, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

National records are inherently significant

Please stop vandalising the information about the CHS swim team. They haven't lost in 20 plus years...hello! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.14.84.60 (talk) 23:38, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Notable people

What's a Fatathon? What's a Bailathon? RJFJR (talk) 20:40, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Petit family murders

Why have you removed this recent tragedy from the page for Cheshire along with the fact that it was featured on Dateline NBC? The same program also featured a murder in Chandlerville, Illinois, and you allowed a similar post to be added to Chandlerville's page, but not Cheshire's. Why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.218.161.2 (talk) 15:40, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

I didn't remove anything, it was merged under Home invasion case in the History section. Didn't you view the article history? Markvs88 (talk) 16:38, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. I saw the material relating to the Petit family murders as indicated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.90.46.34 (talk) 13:59, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Notable People and "Vandalism"

I'm not vandalizing, just have a legitimate position that John Hollstrom's name does not meet Wiki notability standards. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability Instead of accusing me of vandalism and threatening to ban me, why don't you defend your position in terms of Wiki standards? Who's to say that YOU are not vandalizing, or even that you are Mr. Hollstrom? His name has been off this list for several months now, and YOU keep adding it back. Liz Hale 17:38 29 September 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.203.49.238 (talk)

As long as John Holmstrom has an article, there isn't really a point to arguing here over whether he is notable. If you believe the subject is not notable, then you should request deletion of his article at WP:AfD. If the article is deleted due to a lack of notability, then he should be removed. As editors who have not registered for accounts cannot complete an WP:AfD listing, let me know if you want to go down that route and need help. Monty₈₄₅ 17:44, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

I agree with Monty845, and as the John Holmstrom article now passes the "2 citation minimum", the issue should be moot. Best, Markvs88 (talk) 18:12, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Your points above are well taken, though in reviewing the history of the John Holmstrom page, it appears that Mr. Holmstrom himself has created most of it. Liz Hale 18:53 29 September 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.203.49.238 (talk) 18:55, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Regarding Cheshire as part of the Farmington Valley

I've recently gone ahead and changed the declared region for Cheshire from "Central Farmington Valley" to "Central Quinnipiac Valley".

I'm not sure who originally decided to lump Cheshire into the Farmington Valley. One thing is for certain: the claim did not come from credible source material. The Farmington River certainly doesn't flow through Cheshire. Furthermore, the town is so distant from the river that it doesn't even fall within the Farmington's drainage basin. Suffice it to say that not a single drop of rain which falls on Cheshire ever makes it to the Farmington River. Thus, I cannot find any valid reason for considering Cheshire part of the Farmington Valley.

Moreover, the Quinnipiac River -a regionally significant river in its own right- does flow through the northeast corner of Cheshire and gathers a fair amount of water from the eastern side of town. The Wikipedia article for the Quinnipiac River even portrays Cheshire as squarely falling within the Quinnipiac Valley.

I've edited the infobox accordingly. —Jgcoleman (talk) 15:09, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Money Magazine Rankings

The references for both the 2009 and 2011 Money Magazine rankings are dead. That might not be a big deal for minor facts (sometimes links go dead without warning), but it is a big deal when the facts that those references were supporting are in the article's lead paragraph. In fact, its actually very tough to find functioning links online to any of those archival, annual Money Magazine lists.

• For one thing, the ephemeral nature of these lists online begs the question of whether or not Money Magazine's rankings are really significant enough to be lead material.
• Second, I've even gone back and found what appears to be a copy of the Money Magazine list from 2011... Cheshire doesn't seem to be present.

I have removed Money Magazine references from the lead for the time being because I cannot find any evidence that they are true. For a given fact to be lead paragraph material, there should be no question whatsoever about its validity... confirmation should be readily available via functioning citations. If live links can be found to this information, feel free to reincorporate the rankings. —Jgcoleman (talk) 15:43, 21 April 2016 (UTC)