Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New Jersey/Archive 5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 ← Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6

Article assessment

Hello WPNJ. The last time anyone fulfilled one of your requests for assessment was two years ago. I bring this up because I have a request in and would prefer not to wait another two years. Would someone please take a look at Princeton University Chapel? Thanks. Lagrange613 (talk) 18:56, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Admin HQ of Rutgers University system

Precisely where is the administrative HQ of the Rutgers University system?

At Talk:Rutgers_University#Location I found some hints that it may be New Brunswick...

WhisperToMe (talk) 17:51, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Student housing in Newark NJ

I found a source discussing a student housing project in Newark, NJ:

  • D'Onofrio, Jillian. "Independent Living." New York Construction at McGraw-Hill Construction. August 2006.

WhisperToMe (talk) 10:48, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Populate categories

Is there an easier way to populate NJ related categories, specifically the People from____Township, New Jersey, or People from_____, New Jersey, etc, and eventually refine the categories of People from ___County, New Jersey. For instance, Category:People from Bergen County, New Jersey. There are several sub-categories, which need growth — including Category:People from Rochelle Park, New Jersey (containing 1 page), Category:People from Rockleigh, New Jersey (1 page), and Category:People from North Arlington, New Jersey (2 pages). Tinton5 (talk) 21:56, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Also, how many pages in a category is sufficient? At least 5? 1 page seems rather pointless of even having a category, unless there are several people from that location. If only one person is from Smithburg, then we wouldn't waste our time creating a People from Smithburg, New Jersey. Tinton5 (talk) 21:59, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
I understand your concern. Of the 70 municipalities in Bergen County, 55 have four or more notables in the "People from..." category. As long as I was subdividing Category:People from Bergen County, New Jersey as finely as I could, I ended up with a handful of categories with only one or two entries. I continue to research notables from New Jersey in an effort to expand these categories, and as 65 of 70 municipalities have identifiable notables, it seemed worth the effort to try to populate them all, rather than keep some entries in the parent simply because I couldn't fin other notables from the same place. All of the entries remaining in Category:People from Bergen County, New Jersey are ones that I cannot place into a municipality based on lack of information. Alansohn (talk) 05:12, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Municipal naming

Recently Washington Township, Bergen County, New Jersey was renamed to Township of Washington, Bergen County, New Jersey. "Township of Washington" is formally correct, but is not the common name. Many other municipalities have more formal names, such as "City of Jersey City" or "Township of River Vale", but we don't use these names by convention. This conforms with WP:TITLE. Is there consensus to move this article back to "Washington Township"? --ChrisRuvolo (t) 16:35, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

If I understand correctly, there are four "Washington Townships", one "Township of Washington," and one "Washington" in New Jersey. Using the correct name, Township of Washington, for the article in question helps resolve the issue of ambiguity. The policy quoted above, certainly not black & white, recognizes this. Gjs238 (talk) 17:04, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
Another point I neglected to mention earlier is that it's quite easy to refer to the Township of River Vale as River Vale, or the City of Jersey City as Jersey City, but referring to the Township of Washington (of which there is only one in New Jersey) as Washington or Washington Township creates an ambiguity where one did not previously exist. Gjs238 (talk) 23:06, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
The the municipality is primarily referred to as "Washington Township". It is never referred to as "Washington" and usually only as "Township of Washington" regarding official municipal business or organizations. Examples: [1] [2] [3]. That the name "Township of Washington" may be unique would only serve to disambiguate if it was widely known that the other municipalities don't have official names. I don't believe that to be the case. BTW, the reason the ".., Bergen County, .." clause was added to the name was to disambiguate it against the other Washington Townships. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 03:35, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
The Bergen Record is notorious for inaccuracies. I have given up and avoid granting interviews for them, knowing that the details will not be accurately presented. Perhaps a better reference is the Township's own website [4]. Gjs238 (talk) 11:08, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
Perhaps you would prefer the AP? [5] [6] Or the NYT? [7] [8] [9] [10] or the Star-Ledger? [11] [12] [13] .. The question is not about the official name, but what the community is actually called in practice. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 15:53, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
"BTW, the reason the ".., Bergen County, .." clause was added to the name was to disambiguate it against the other Washington Townships. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 03:35, 4 November 2011 (UTC)" Well, of course. If the Township of Washington (a unique name BTW) is going to be referred to as Washington Township (the official name of four other townships in NJ) then it must somehow be disambiguated. Gjs238 (talk) 11:15, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

I agree with Chris on this article name. While "Township of Washington" is a viable option, we have other precedents such as "The Township of South Orange Village", which has an article titled South Orange, New Jersey, where we ignore a formal title. Washington, New Jersey is *not* a township, so no form of government is needed for the article title. Township of Washington, Bergen County, New Jersey does differentiate, but could well create confusion by not complying with the Washington Township, New Jersey standard. Furthermore, given the longstanding nature of the status quo on municipality article names in New Jersey, the robust number of editors editing these articles, and the inherently controversial nature of such moves, such proposed changes should not be made unilaterally but should be first discussed at WP:RM, with appropriate notes left her to ensure that we can get broad participation from New Jersey editors. Alansohn (talk) 15:02, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Good points, but as with the other examples given, there is only one South Orange currently existing in NJ, so this doesn't accurately address the ambiguity issue. Gjs238 (talk) 16:13, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
The "Bergen County" portion of the title handled the ambiguity before. I don't see why that is insufficient. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 17:01, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Unless there is objection, I will move the article back tomorrow. Cheers. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 18:06, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

I agree that it should be changed back to Washington Township, Bergen County, New Jersey, per the reasoning above. We do not use official names for article titles. We often use the official names in the lead sentence, followed by a more common or colloquial name, which is a standard practice. Tinton5 (talk) 03:38, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
Agreed. I added that yesterday. The article is now moved back. Thanks, everyone. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 20:46, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Princeton

Well, voters approved consolidation today. As I posted on at Talk:Borough of Princeton, New Jersey, what are we going to do with the articles? (Princeton Borough and Princeton Township) I get the idea that the Township will be the main entity, so we have a few open options. Any thoughts? Mitch32(Never support those who think in the box) 03:01, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Bon Jovi proposal

I have proposed the creation of a WikiProject Bon Jovi here. Bon Jovi is ranked mid-importance on this project, so if you would like to join or add input, please go the discussion. Thanks! Toa Nidhiki05 19:48, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Garret Hobart

I have nominated Garret Hobart, vice president under McKinley and a lifelong New Jerseyan, for GA, review welcome.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:28, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Census 2010 demographic and geographic data

Hello, all. Together with Alansohn (t c), we have downloaded and compiled the 2010 Census demographic and geographic data for NJ municipalities and CDPs, see the spreadsheet here: [14]. Based on this, we generated two templates {{USCensusDemographics}}, and {{USCensusGeography}} that can be used to populate this data into articles. Values from the spreadsheet were automatically converted and are listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject New Jersey/Census 2010/Demographics. Proposed usage in articles are as follows: 

== Geography ==

{{subst:USCensusGeography|year=2010|type=township|place=River Vale Township; Bergen County|9659|7086|73.4|2196|22.7|1533|15.9|9518|8582|68|4|813|0|51|141|481|3521|3421|100|4.28|0.26|4.01|2408.1|877.8|3421|79.2|37.4|70.2|6.6|20.8|18.4|11.5|2.82|3.24|91.5|90.9|0.6|8.3|0.2|0.0|0.2|26.6|5.7|19.1|32.7|15.9|44.2|93.6|89.3}}

== Demographics ==

===2010 Census===
{{USCensusDemographics|year=2010|type=township|place=River Vale Township; Bergen County|9659|7086|73.4|2196|22.7|1533|15.9|9518|8582|68|4|813|0|51|141|481|3521|3421|100|4.28|0.26|4.01|2408.1|877.8|3421|79.2|37.4|70.2|6.6|20.8|18.4|11.5|2.82|3.24|91.5|90.9|0.6|8.3|0.2|0.0|0.2|26.6|5.7|19.1|32.7|15.9|44.2|93.6|89.3}}

===2000 Census===
... etc..

Please note that the USCensusGeography template use is intended to be subst:'ed since the generated text is smaller than the full data given above, and we don't anticipate this text having to change. The demographic data might potentially change in the future, so it is not substed. Before populating this into most articles, I was hoping to get some feedback from the project. Outstanding issues are mainly around references. Currently the templates refer to a <ref name="Census2010"/> reference that must exist outside of the template. To see examples of how the template looks, please see any of the articles listed at Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:USCensusDemographics. Any feedback welcomed. Thanks much. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 19:38, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Culture of North Jersey vs. South Jersey

Hi guys! I found...

It talks a bit about the cultural divide between the North and the South. Might be a helpful source! WhisperToMe (talk) 01:14, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Tasks for 2012

I want to extend to all those who have worked on New Jersey related articles my thanks for all of their efforts in 2011 and my best wishes for continued success in 2012. Over the past few days I have been thinking about the substantial number of tasks that are open already or will start with 2012 and want to list them for discussion and some joint collaborative effort:

  1. Updating articles with Census 2010 data. I've worked with User:ChrisRuvolo on this one and we co-created and populated templates for every municipality and CDP in the state with the latest census data. Several dozen are complete with hundreds left to go.
  2. Updating Assembly/Senate articles and templates to reflect new members often in new districts.
  3. Updating Freeholder templates and County articles to reflect new freeholders.
  4. Updating municipal articles to reflect changes in local government in the new year.

We've accomplished so much and there is so much more that we can do working on these issues collaboratively. Alansohn (talk) 16:56, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

We also need to expand the New Jersey Redistricting Commission article, generate maps and update articles for the new congressional districts settled upon last week. See [15] [16] [17]. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 17:44, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Requested article drive

This list is full of red links that are potential articles for creation (places, malls, parks, golf courses, schools, landmarks, etc). Please feel free to help contribute turning these links blue, as well as adding to the list. Thanks to all. Tinton5 (talk) 03:22, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

New Jersey county newspapers aren't enough to establish notability?

Currently, there's a proposal to delete the newly-created article KotoriCon (about an anime convention in New Jersey) because it's only being covered by "local newspapers" (mainly the Gloucester County Times). Exactly what else the person expects for an anime convention specifically intended to be friendly to those who can't travel far, I don't know... Allens (talk) 16:46, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Peer review page

I've added a page for peer review requests. Allens (talk) 02:25, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

WikiWomen's History Month

Hi everyone. March is Women's History Month and I'm hoping a few folks here at WP:New Jersey will have interest in putting on events (on and off wiki) related to women's roles in New Jersey's history, society and culture. We've created an event page on English Wikipedia (please translate!) and I hope you'll find the inspiration to participate. These events can take place off wiki, like edit-a-thons, or on wiki, such as themes and translations. Please visit the page here: WikiWomen's History Month. Thanks for your consideration and I look forward to seeing events take place! SarahStierch (talk) 19:02, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Seton Hall University & Rutgers

I noticed that WikiProjects Seton Hall University and Rutgers are both currently in an inactive status and would like to add them under the supported projects list of WikiProject United States. Before I do that though I wanted to give you first dibs on adding it under your scope. Please let me know if you have any questions. Kumioko (talk) 18:06, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Since this has been out here for about 5 days with no complaints I am going to go ahead and add these. Please let me know if you have any comments. Kumioko (talk) 02:43, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
It would probably be appropriate to put it under the New Jersey project. I would think they would still be neglected under a wider WikiProject United States.ColonelHenry (talk) 13:18, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

New York - New Jersey Highlands (article title spacing)

I commented at this article's talk page moments ago stating: What is the good reason behind the awkward space-dash-space between New York and New Jersey? Why is it New York - New Jersey instead of New York-New Jersey? This makes for an awkwardly unnecessary redirect to this title which seems to strike me as an conspicuous typographical quirk. I submit it here for similar review. ThanksColonelHenry (talk) 13:18, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Newark article

We recently upgraded the Newark, New Jersey article, earning GA status. I changed the status on the Newark talk page, but it's not showing up as GA on your Wikiproject. Anyway, just a heads-up if someone wants to have the change reflected here.--Chimino (talk) 13:44, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Move proposal

Talk:Anderson Park, New Jersey#Move. I just posted this to propose renaming this to Anderson Park (Montclair, New Jersey). Please leave your thoughts. Mitch32(There is a destiny that makes us... family.) 09:37, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with Anderson Park vis-a-vis Montclair. But if it just a section of Montclair, why not incorporate relevant material into the Montclair, New Jersey article and create both Anderson Park, New Jersey and Anderson Park (Montclair, New Jersey) as redirects to the Montclair article. The questions to be asked are:
  • Is there enough discrete information to justify its own article (as compared to other relevant/related articles)?
  • how much information would the article have that isn't redundant on Montclair, New Jersey or elsewhere.
  • Would this information (and other Montclair neighborhoods) be better served if incorporated into Montclair, New Jersey.
Just a few thoughts. I would contact User:Alansohn since he seems to have more experience and expertise about how to name/format New Jersey town/neighborhood articles. That's been his ongoing work for the last few years. --ColonelHenry (talk) 20:31, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

There is currently no Agriculture in New Jersey article?

Rather odd for a state that calls itself the "Garden State" to not have an article on this topic. There is more than enough information on the state's websites (Dept.Agriculture, Jersey Fresh), Rutgers University's Cooperative Extenstion/Agricultural Research Service, USDA website, USDA Census of Agriculture, county agriculture boards/farm bureaus, and other resources to write a good, comprehensive article. Contact me if you are interested in helping on such a project.--ColonelHenry (talk) 20:25, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Joyce Kilmer GA nomination

The Joyce Kilmer was a GA from 2007-2009. It was reassessed and demoted. I took the last two days to revise it and renominated it to return to GA-status. Please take a look at the article and review it against the GA criteria.--ColonelHenry (talk) 16:34, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

NJ495

Exit list discussion Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. Roads#New Jersey Route 495 Djflem (talk) 15:23, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

New Jersey 101

welcome hope you like new jersey so far










Alexia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.116.158.254 (talk) 22:10, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

List of Justices of the Supreme Court of New Jersey

I have started a List of Justices of the Supreme Court of New Jersey. This page is missing a lot of names and other information, and any help in filling it in would be appreciated. Cheers! bd2412 T 04:19, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Sussex County, New Jersey

I'd like to bring this article to a standard where it could be ready for FAC. I think I'm about 70% of the way there. If anyone has any suggestions on how to get that last 30% done and done well, I'd appreciate your questions, comments, and critique.--ColonelHenry (talk) 20:08, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Could you take a look at my NJ-related FAC

My friend, User:DavidinNJ, and I nominated Alcohol laws of New Jersey for Featured Article Status back in February. The nomination has been slow. Would it be possible for a few of this project's participants to take a look at the article and perhaps consider offering support to its FA candidacy, located here: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Alcohol laws of New Jersey/archive1? I appreciate your time and attention to this cause.--ColonelHenry (talk) 16:17, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks to all of you who offered suggestions, and to a few of the WP:NJ contributors who stopped by the FAC discussion. Alcohol laws of New Jersey was promoted a few hours ago. Thanks.--ColonelHenry (talk) 12:15, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

AfD notification

There is a discussion which may be of interest to this project occurring at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Union Hill Middle School. Gtwfan52 (talk) 17:28, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Featured List candidate: List of colonial governors of New Jersey

I finally finished my overhaul of List of colonial governors of New Jersey and nominated it for Featured list status. The nomination can be found here: Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of colonial governors of New Jersey/archive1. If anyone wants to stop by and help in this recent major step in improving and polishing the article for prime time (and maybe offer some support) I would appreciate it. --ColonelHenry (talk) 04:28, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Newarklocator.jpg

File:Newarklocator.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 01:49, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Milledoler.jpg

File:Milledoler.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 02:15, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Peter Stuyvesant

Is Peter Stuyvesant within the scope of your project? -- 70.24.245.196 (talk) 06:03, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't see why he would not be within the scope...since as Director-General of New Netherland, Stuyvesant governed over the colony and managed military affairs (expeditions against the Swedes, Lenape, etc.) within NJ territory.--ColonelHenry (talk) 04:32, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
Members of WPNYC dispute that, saying that WPNYC owns it. -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 11:00, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

9.5.07AMCGardenStatePlaza.JPG

image:9.5.07AMCGardenStatePlaza.JPG has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 08:02, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

MorristownMunicipalAirport.jpg

image:MorristownMunicipalAirport.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 04:41, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Lieutenant Governor of New Jersey

I've been revising Lieutenant Governor of New Jersey with the goal of making it a GA. I would like a few opinions on how the article can be improved and if more content could be added. Thanks.--ColonelHenry (talk) 16:02, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

North, Central & South Jersey

I added counties in respective Category:North Jersey, Category:Central Jersey and Category:South Jersey categories, but I think we should come to a consensus about what you all think.. Which counties belong where. Dwscomet (talk) 11:54, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

  • It's a good idea, but a lot of South Jersey folks refuse to acknowledge that Central Jersey exists. I always grew up thinking that South Jersey began approximately at Interstate 195, and that North Jersey and Central jersey were divided by Essex (north), Union (Central), Morris (North), Somerset (Central), and Hunterdon could be a tossup depending on who you ask, but generally along the corridor of Interstate 78 or Route 22 makes for a good boundary. The other problem...there are two North Jerseys...people in Northwestern NJ don't really seem to match those from Bergen and Essex County (we're more conservative, more rural and forest, less Italian and Irish)...and for the most part Morris (which really is a hybrid of NW and NE New Jersey and in some places a region all its own). Typically, because of the associations of the Skylands Region for tourism and facts of geology, Hunterdon is often added into this notion of Northwestern NJ. However, as a transplant to NYC, I do enjoy when New Yorkers say they hate South Jersey and say it starts at High Point. If you want to add a North Jersey category, it might not be entirely accurate given the strong showing of a separate Northwest New Jersey identity --ColonelHenry (talk) 16:02, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
NJDOT's definition of North, Central and South Jersey
  • You could use the definition of the three regions as administered by the NJ Department of Transportation, see the image on the right (Njdot-regions-soft.GIF). Though, I disagree with NJDOT on the inclusion of Ocean County into "Central" Jersey...it's clearly, geologically, part of the Outer Coastal Plain physiographic province which is a better judge of what is "South" Jersey. I think reliance on the NJDOT's delineation of the regions would alleviate the concerns regarding original research raised below by User talk:Mr. Matté.--ColonelHenry (talk) 16:37, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
Because there is no set definition of what constitutes North, South, and/or Central Jersey, you're getting into WP:OR by placing certain counties and possibly other places in these categories. I would have avoided creating the categories in the first place and instead have the North, South, and Central Jersey articles stand where they are now. —Mr. Matté (Talk/Contrib) 19:09, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Atlantic City 'Do AC' logo.svg

file:Atlantic City 'Do AC' logo.svg has been nominated for deletion -- 70.24.244.158 (talk) 07:20, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Good Article nomination: Lieutenant Governor of New Jersey

I've nominated my work on Lieutenant Governor of New Jersey for GA status. If anyone is interested in taking a look, I'd appreciate it.--ColonelHenry (talk) 17:55, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Good Article nomination: Kirkpatrick Chapel

I've nominated my work on Kirkpatrick Chapel (at Rutgers) for GA status. If anyone is interested in taking a look, I'd appreciate it.--ColonelHenry (talk) 17:58, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

GAN for New Brunswick Theological Seminary

If anyone from this WikiProject wants to take a whack at a GA review for New Brunswick Theological Seminary, the Reformed Church in America's seminary in New Brunswick, New Jersey, I'd appreciate it. --ColonelHenry (talk) 14:46, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Edit war?

Just to let you know: Category_talk:Mansfield_Township,_Warren_County,_New_Jersey#Edit_war.3F. XOttawahitech (talk) 16:54, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Heislerville

I just came across Heislerville, New Jersey and started tidying it up, but having done a little reading about the organization of place in NJ I wonder if it should be merged with Maurice River Township or just put out of its misery? --Derek Andrews (talk) 16:37, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

New Jersey township articles

Copying this from my talk page; I was about to come here when this discussion was started there, so I decide to copy this post and my response verbatim:


There is a generic issue regarding the titles of articles for townships in New Jersey, some of which must have the word included in the title (e.g., Mendham Township), some which probably don't need it (e.g. North Bergen) and others that have arguments raging over the relative need of the word "Township". While Edgewater Park, New Jersey is probably non-controversial, Mount Holly, New Jersey is more problematic (there are ample sources showing common use of "Mount Holly Township") and there are other moves you have made that appear dead wrong, such as for Woodbridge Township, New Jersey. While I appreciate your zeal in changing these names, these articles have had stable names for over a decade in most cases and (as discussed above), there is a place for discussion of these issues at WT:NJ. Given that moving and retitling articles with hundreds of inbound links will be inherently controversial, please take the time to discuss before making these unilateral moves. Alansohn (talk) 16:41, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

I understand the issue, but the bottom line is the title "Edgewater Park Township, New Jersey" was blatantly incorrect in terms of WP:COMMONNAME and needed to be changed. Seems to me that many of these article were created by data dumping government databases years ago, and which typically use the format "xx Township" but don't reflect common usage at all. If anything, the entire system is backwards, as the default seems to be to include "township" in the the title, when common usage typically doesn't unless there's need for it. The same should be true of our titles, period. "Township" should be removed from all titles unless it can be explicitly shown that common usage includes the word in reliable secondary sources. That is the only system that reflects the proper policy. oknazevad (talk) 16:51, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
There are cases here where "Township" is not needed, some where it's ambiguous and others where it is genuinely needed. Edgewater Park, New Jersey is probably a good example of a case where "Township" wasn't needed. I can offer plenty of sources that show that Mount Holly, New Jersey should use "Township". In articles such as Chester Township, New Jersey (vs. Chester Borough, New Jersey) and Woodbridge Township, New Jersey (vs. Woodbridge (CDP), New Jersey), as well as for all of the Washington Township, New Jersey articles (where it's clear that the common name includes "Township") there are very strong reasons to keep it. We need to approach this issue on a broader basis, rather than one by one, come up with a list of candidate moves and reach agreement on those title. Alansohn (talk) 17:47, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
There's no doubt that there are articles where including "Township" for disambiguation purposes is not only needed but a good idea. But that should be the exception, not the default, which is what appears to be the current case. I do agree that this should be handled systematically, but in light of the current erroneous default, to make a list would be pretty much a counterproductive waste of effort. Instead I propose a review of all NJ municipality articles that currently contain the form of government in the the title (whether "Township", "Borough", "Village" or whatever), and determine whether it is actually needed. Then if it can't be shown that it is specifically needed for disambiguation purposes, move it by default to the version that does not have "Township", etc in the title. I'll start with Bergen County (being the northeast corner), and we can work from there. oknazevad (talk) 18:34, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Bergen County has been checked, and looks good (yay navboxes). Moving on to Passaic county next. oknazevad (talk) 19:25, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Passaic was good. Looking at Morris County, I see these as not needing "Township" in their titles:
In none of these cases does the word "Township" serve to disambiguate the article from another similarly named municipality anywhere else in the state. Unless it can be shown that people commonly use "Township" when referring to the place, they should be moved in line with WP:COMMONNAME. oknazevad (talk) 20:00, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
PS, all of these have the name without "township" already redirecting to the article, indicating to me that the word "Township" is not needed. oknazevad (talk) 20:09, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
I will look through and I hope other editors will evaluate these names as well. We have redirects for Teaneck Township, New Jersey and Bloomfield Township, New Jersey which merely serve as placeholders. I don't think that the existence of a redirect in either direction establishes evidence that the title isn't needed. Alansohn (talk) 20:13, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
I would suggest, in addition to considering similarly-named municipalities elsewhere in the state, that a consideration for postal addresses be made. I suspect there are very few people who say they live in "Jefferson Township"; most probably say they live in one of the several hamlets within, and I'm curious if Jefferson or Jefferson Township is even a valid postal address. Perhaps those places without valid postal addresses should stay with the "township" in their name. Famartin (talk) 21:39, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Outside of Bergen, most townships don;t have their own ZIP codes, and the word "township" probably is necessary to make clear what is being referenced.I keep a list of Zip Codes in a tab on my computer and the task of matching up places to ZIP codes isn't trivial. Jefferson Township is an excellent example. Alansohn (talk) 22:34, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

It's pretty much a given to definitely include the word "township" when you have the same name of two municipalities, such as the ones above, like Chester Township and Chester Borough (by the way, Chester, New Jersey redirect should be a DAB page), Mendham Township and Borough, Freehold Township and Borough, and some others, as well as not mixing up the Township and their CDP that share the same name, like Woodbridge. But I am leaning towards leaving township out of certain ones that are commonly referred to without using "Township". We just have to see which ones. Townships in Hudson and Bergen Counties do not use the word Township ever (almost all of north Jersey, except Morris County examples provided above, as well as a few others). Correct me if I'm wrong, but we want this encyclopedia to have consistency, whereas there are issues with that. Perfect examples include the naming of articles. Cherry Hill Township, New Jersey and Medford Township, New Jersey were moved, but Mullica Township, New Jersey remains. Also on the highway, the words Township, Borough, Village are used sometimes, but on smaller guide signs. Tinton5 (talk) 01:54, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

A little off topic, and not under our control (well, maybe one day), but Chester should be one municipality, Mendham should be one municipality, Freehold should be one municipality, and some others as well, just like Princeton. Tinton5 (talk) 01:58, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

AfC submission

Would you mind checking this submission out? Thanks, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:36, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

  • There are no sources in the article in general, and none supporting the definition provided regarding the Northern Valley. As this is only a geographic area, I don't see any reason to include a list of schools and school districts. Without sources I don't see how this article should be moved into mainspace. Alansohn (talk) 02:50, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Popular pages tool update

As of January, the popular pages tool has moved from the Toolserver to Wikimedia Tool Labs. The code has changed significantly from the Toolserver version, but users should notice few differences. Please take a moment to look over your project's list for any anomalies, such as pages that you expect to see that are missing or pages that seem to have more views than expected. Note that unlike other tools, this tool aggregates all views from redirects, which means it will typically have higher numbers. (For January 2014 specifically, 35 hours of data is missing from the WMF data, which was approximated from other dates. For most articles, this should yield a more accurate number. However, a few articles, like ones featured on the Main Page, may be off).

Web tools, to replace the ones at tools:~alexz/pop, will become available over the next few weeks at toollabs:popularpages. All of the historical data (back to July 2009 for some projects) has been copied over. The tool to view historical data is currently partially available (assessment data and a few projects may not be available at the moment). The tool to add new projects to the bot's list is also available now (editing the configuration of current projects coming soon). Unlike the previous tool, all changes will be effective immediately. OAuth is used to authenticate users, allowing only regular users to make changes to prevent abuse. A visible history of configuration additions and changes is coming soon. Once tools become fully available, their toolserver versions will redirect to Labs.

If you have any questions, want to report any bugs, or there are any features you would like to see that aren't currently available on the Toolserver tools, see the updated FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Mr.Z-bot (talk) (for Mr.Z-man) 05:18, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

List of Rutgers University people

I'd like to clean up and develop the List of Rutgers University people since it is largely unformatted and is subject to deterioration because of its lack of structure, format, and criteria. I would like to ask the community for solutions and ideas on what would be the best way to present this large list of information.

It's a quandary, and I'd like to have a few informed ideas, perhaps being pointed to some good practices at other university's alumni/faculty/people lists, and explore this before I go forward on improving the list. Thanks in advance.--ColonelHenry (talk) 16:53, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

  • You probably ought to take a look at List of Harvard University people, which seems to combine many of the categories you're looking to split, and use that as a model. I do agree that "people" is a bit broad, but it provides a way to combine Nobel Prize winners with mere athletes. Even if the the word "alumni" were used, non-graduates would be included, but "people" seems to provide even more wiggle room. You also have the article for President of Harvard University, which seems to be an excellent model for renaming List of Rutgers University presidents to President of Rutgers University. I know of no articles for major donors and you may want to see if there is any other college that has lists of people that have been broken down as finely as you propose. Alansohn (talk) 02:25, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

AfC submission - 04/06

Draft:Garrison-Wills House. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 13:34, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Pride 2014

You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride 2014, a campaign to create and improve LGBT-related content at Wikipedia and its sister projects. The campaign will take place throughout the month of June, culminating with a multinational edit-a-thon on June 21. Meetups are being held in some cities, or you can participate remotely. All constructive edits are welcome in order to contribute to Wikipedia's mission of providing quality, accurate information. Articles within Category:LGBT in the Americas may be of particular interest. You can also upload LGBT-related images by participating in Wikimedia Commons' LGBT-related photo challenge. You are encouraged to share the results of your work here. Happy editing! --Another Believer (Talk) 21:00, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Leaflet For Wikiproject New Jersey At Wikimania 2014

Hi all,

My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.

One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.

This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:

• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film

• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.

• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.

• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____

• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost

For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:
Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (talk) 12:19, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Requested move

WP:NJ is encouraged to participate in the requested article move at Talk:Gloucester County College#Requested move. Thanks. Jrcla2 (talk) 18:46, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Article for deletion discussion

Should Joe McCallum be deleted ad per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joe McCallum? Djflem (talk) 07:56, 4 July 2014 (UTC) At issue: Are, for example, Daneek Miller, Emma Mitts, and Katy Tang who council members from larger cities inherently more notable and do the articles about them make a more valuable contribution to Wikipedia than one about McCallum? Djflem (talk) 11:24, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Relationship with WikiProject United States

People from a variety of WikiProjects have had concerns about the scope of WikiProject United States and its relationship with other WikiProjects. We have created an RFC and invite all interested editors to discuss it at: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject United States#Mission statement for WikiProject United States. Thanks,

Greetings from GLAM-Wiki US

Invitation to join GLAM-Wiki US
tight
tight

Hello! This WikiProject aligns closely with the work of the GLAM-Wiki initiative (Galleries, Libraries, Archives, and Museums), a global community of volunteers who assist cultural institutions with sharing resources with Wikimedia. GLAM-Wiki US is a new community initiative focused on organizing cultural collaborations within the United States. GLAM organizations are diverse and span numerous topics, from libraries and art museums to science centers and historic sites. We currently have a backlog of interested institutions- and we need your help!

Are you interested in helping with current or future GLAM projects? Join→ Online Volunteers

We hope you'll join the growing GLAM-Wiki community in the US. Thank you!
-Lori Phillips (Talk), US Cultural Partnerships Coordinator
For more information visit→ The GLAM:US portal or GLAM-Wiki on Outreach

Article alerts

This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 09:28, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

Category discussion

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 July 27#Category:Media in New Jersey

One Newark reorganization plan & Christie administration

A discussion is taking place at the Governorship of Chris Christie talk page about One Newark school reorganization plan being implemented by his administration. which links here: Talk:Governorship of Chris Christie#RFC: Should material about the New Jersey Public School system be included in the article?

TFAR notification

I've nominated an article relevant to this project for WP:TFAR consideration, discussion at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/George B. McClellan. — Cirt (talk) 20:15, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Move of Port Authority Trans-Hudson

I nominated to move the article Port Authority Trans-Hudson to PATH (rapid transit) at Talk:Port Authority Trans-Hudson#Requested move 09 October 2014. I believe there is consensus that PATH is the common name for the system, but there are disagreements as to how PATH should be disambiguated. Any comment from members of this project would be helpful. Thank you. Tinlinkin (talk) 19:53, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Embedded list of notables with a see also to the corresponding category

At some point over the past few years, I saw an article for a city that had a list of notables and at the top of the the list was a see also to the corresponding category for notables from that place, and I started implementing that practice in hundreds of articles. For example, the Notable people section in the article for Dumont, New Jersey has a see also link at the top of the section to Category:People from Dumont, New Jersey, and there are hundreds of other articles for places in New Jersey and the surrounding area that implement this as well. This practice serves several purposes: 1) In the exact spirit of WP:CLS, it allows the embedded list to be updated from the corresponding category and to have the category updated from the embedded list in synergistic fashion when one gets out of synch with the other, allowing links and entries to be updated from each other. 2) It serves as a marker to remind those adding notables to the embedded list to remember to add the entry to the corresponding category. 3) It allows the category to be readily carried over when the embedded list is turned into a standalone article. 4) And it provides a gateway to allow readers to use the category system to navigate across other categories for notables from the same area. I have seen this method used elsewhere, but there are editors who have raised an issue with this technique. Does this practice contravene policy? Is there any issue with doing this in articles? I've also posted this to Wikipedia talk:Categories, lists, and navigation templates which is probably the best place for a centralized discussion. Alansohn (talk) 21:53, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Expert attention

This is a notice about Category:New Jersey articles needing expert attention, which might be of interest to your WikiProject. It will take a while before the category is populated. Iceblock (talk) 18:11, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Goals for 2015

Any input for goals during the new year? Such as expanding pages, good articles, etc. Tinton5 (talk) 17:24, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

  • The best thing this project can do is to work to have the prohibition against article creation by Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) removed. He's very prolific on the topic, as you all are well aware. Carrite (talk) 17:47, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
  • First off, kudos to Tinton5 for the suggestion and thanks to all those editors who have created so many New Jersey-related articles in 2014. We would definitely benefit from greater communication and collaboration going forward. As an early goal for 2015, I'd like to suggest that we coordinate updating articles for counties, legislators and municipalities to reflect those taking office in the new year. There are also many articles in general that would benefit from expansion, but we should think about some specific targets -- cities, counties, people -- that would benefit from expansion and improvement to good article / featured article status. More pictures would also make many articles more appealing. I second the recommendation that Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) be freed of his editing restrictions. Alansohn (talk) 18:23, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
  • I'm a New Yorker. Am I still allowed to help? As a suggestion, we could work on the Hudson River and Delaware River articles. I am working on the Hudson River one at the moment. Perhaps also working on the articles of major cities in New Jersey would help too. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 20:40, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
  • I also agree that User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) should be allowed to create NJ-related articles again.
    On another note, I will see if I can work on some of the locality articles to improve them. I've seen a lot of articles about places that aren't so good. The same goes for other articles as well; in general, this WikiProject needs a relative WikiWork factor of 5.17, meaning that many articles must be improved from a start-class average. Additionally, I trust that Alansohn will keep up his high-quality edits on articles regarding New Jersey locations. Epicgenius (talk) 21:41, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
  • I defer to Alansohn (talk) on New Jersey township and borough articles, his editing on that topic is beyond superior. Castncoot (talk) 23:13, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pretty much all of the municipal articles contain out-of-date election information; the most recent municipal-specific results are typically from two presidential/gubernatorial elections ago. I've been wanting to create a subst:template through a spreadsheet of election data that will easily insert the new data into the articles for those who are more familiar with bots and those other editing programs like Twinkle, etc but real life is catching up. I'll whip up a test tonight and will be willing to work with anyone who can put the new data into the articles. —Mr. Matté (Talk/Contrib) 01:29, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Just so I'm not a complete bump on the log, I went ahead and at least created the text that can be used to update municipal articles for the 2012 Presidential and 2013 Gubernatorial elections here and here respectively. Just make sure that the grammar works (ie there's no instances of "1 ballots were cast...") and the municipality type is correct. —Mr. Matté (Talk/Contrib) 23:28, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
  • I understand Alansohn's request as one for help (rather than praise, which is well deserved). To that end I will work on the Hudson County articles with updates on officeholders once new terms start in January. I intend to continue to expand on transportation articles as they relate to economic engines of the ports, i.e.: Foreign Trade Zone 49, NY/NJ and Port of Camden. New articles which could be created include the Pilgrim Pipelne (and generally the transport of Bakken oil ) thru the state and the Transco Pipeline (New Jersey). Considering Christie's plans, the Governorship of Chris Christie needs a major re-work/with history and updates to bring update and to bring some consistency to coverage, which now is erratic. Solar power in New Jersey could really use some photos and made more layperson friendly: List of solar farms in New Jersey or list of photovoltaic power stations could be created. Wind power in New Jersey need to be monitored since the feds have come up with the cash off offshore projects. Bergen Bus Rapid Transit could be split from parent since the project in the implementation phase and looks like it might become a reality. The possibly precedent setting LG Electronics#Proposed USA headquarters could easily be split and warrants an article, too. Djflem (talk) 22:11, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
  • An area with a great deal of potential for growth is the historical background to many New Jersey settlements. User:Tinton5 has done a great job here listing many places needing articles, but there are many other historic settlements without articles. Follow a topographic map through Frankford Township, for example, and you will find many former railway towns along the old line without articles, such as Balesville. The same can be said of the old river towns. Follow the Musconetcong River east from the Delaware and there are many settlements with rich histories, such as Hughesville in Hunterdon County, but no article. Other settlements have well-established articles, but are lacking a history section, such as Finesville. In my opinion, it would add a richness to New Jersey if articles were created for these lost settlements, or if histories were added to articles already written. Thank you, Magnolia677 (talk) 19:28, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
  • All excellent ideas on the table. I'm glad to start this thread. We should definitely update the elections, mayor terms, etc. Alan has a great deal of knowledge on that subject, as well as population facts to each municipality. I give him a huge amount of props for that. Magnolia has done fantastic also (and still is) with finding places throughout the state..most of which I've never heard of and I'm sure readers out there haven't either. All of this will help expand our encyclopedia and provide the reader with as much info as possible. I haven't been on in the last few days due to the holidays and such, but I am going through each municipality and performing some minor clean up. We should work together and combine our knowledge to make each page informative and maybe a little fun too. I am willing to work with you all. Hope everyone had a nice holiday and looking forward to a great new year. Thank you to all. Tinton5 (talk) 16:46, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
  • List of power stations in New Jersey, worth keeping? Djflem (talk) 19:12, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
    • The way it looks now, it should be merged or deleted. But expansion should be considered too. If each power plant doesn't have a link, then it may not be worth keeping. Tinton5 (talk) 18:55, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Are pages on middle schools worth keeping? (Runne (talk) 21:44, 28 December 2014 (UTC))

New Jersey Devils FAR

I have nominated New Jersey Devils for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Gloss 00:37, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Standardization of New Jersey city/town articles

I have noticed the recent efforts of User:Bkonrad to standardize the hatnotes on New Jersey articles.

I have recently been making edits to city/town articles about New Jersey, and have also tried to standardize articles which I edit.

For example, on many city/town articles across the United States (and in New Jersey), geo-coordinates are included in the "geography" section of articles. I believe this is a vestige from the pre-infobox days, and I have been removing these, as suggested in Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/US Guideline.

I have also been trimming excessive external links from city/town articles, and have left the edit summary "per WP:ELMINOFFICIAL and WP:LINKFARM".

I would like to begin a discussion about two other features found almost exclusively on New Jersey city/town articles. Ideally, a consensus can be reached.

  • First, on the "notable people" section of many New Jersey articles, such as Andover, New Jersey, there has been the addition of "see also:category". This is found only on New Jersey articles, and my concern is that it is unnecessary and sloppy, because sending readers to a category about "People from Foo, New Jersey", is to send them to a place with many dubious entries (categories are added liberally to biographical articles). If someone is notable, add them to the list with a reliable source—done. I have not found a Wiki rule about adding categories in this way to city/town articles.
  • Second, on the "notable people" section of many New Jersey articles, such as Newton, New Jersey, there is a header which states that inclusion in that section is for "people who were born in, residents of, or otherwise closely associated with" that city. According to Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/US Guideline, this is not correct. It should instead state that the list includes "any famous or notable individuals that were born, or lived for a significant amount of time, in the city". Moreover, readers of the article should not be the target of Wiki policy or inclusion criteria. Instead, this header should be removed, and added as hidden text as a gentle reminder to editors who wish to add new names to the list. And it should be in accordance with the agreed-upon standards found in Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/US Guideline.

Thank you for your input on these two points. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:26, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

  • The issue of a category link was already discussed at Wikipedia_talk:Categories,_lists,_and_navigation_templates#Embedded list of notables with a see also to the corresponding category and the case was made that the category link provides a cross reference that allows the list of notables and the corresponding category to be built and expanded from each other. As the one independent editor responded there "Magnolia677 seems to essentially concede your points in favor of including the cat link. The complaint about the wrong articles being placed in categories is 1) not relevant here on the issue of where a category link should be placed, and 2) fixable by editing the improperly categorized articles." Magnolia677 has repeatedly edit warred, fought this battle and lost and now is forum shopping, as he won't accept the clear benefits that have made the lists of notables in New Jersey the most complete and thoroughly sourced among all states nationwide.
  • Magnolia677 insists that both WP:USCITIES mandates a certain heading (which it doesn't) and then takes the exact opposite position that no heading of any kind should be used. Despite Magnolia677's persistent misrepresentations, WP:USCITIES is merely "advice about style" and it "is not a formal Wikipedia policy or guideline and is not part of the Manual of Style". Even the use of the word "famous" in WP:USCITIES seems completely unjustified, as Wikipedia:Notability (among other places throughout Wikipedia) is clear that "notability does not necessarily depend on things such as fame, importance, or popularity"; notability is not fame. More than any other aspect of articles for places, readers and new editors feel the need to add someone they know to a list of notables in an article. Providing a remarkably brief and consistent note explaining what should be included only serves to aid everyone involved. Again, we're ahead of the curve.
  • We've done a lot of great work as a project and there are many aspects here that are not reproduced elsewhere. There are details in nearly every article about geography, education, government, politics and notables that go far above and beyond what's done in other states. As is being done right now in Mercer County and elsewhere, we're in the process of creating the thousands of articles for every single populated place in the state listed by GNIS, NJ locality search and Google Maps, to a level not found anywhere else in the nation. Yet it is truly remarkable how persistent some editors are in trying to reduce Wikipedia to the lowest possible standard; It isn't done somewhere else, so it can't be done here. I'd love to see editors who are here to build an encyclopedia trying to export the best of WP:NJ to the other 49 states, rather than trying to fight a war to force WP:NJ meet the lowest possible standard of quality. Alansohn (talk) 16:31, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live!

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Paulins Kill will be at Featured article review

I intend to nominate Paulins Kill for a FAR. I've opened up a discussion here. « Ryūkotsusei » 21:53, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Looks like its on the way to WP:FARC. « Ryūkotsusei » 16:00, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

State vs. county maps on unincorporated community pages (was "Let's discuss this now")

I have noticed alot of "drama" on certain pages, so I am willing to get as much interaction and discussion as possible before some things get out of hand. First off, infoboxes that contain flags. It is still unclear why some agree to insert them and those who don't include them at all. As an encyclopedia, we should provide consistency to the articles. WP:INFOBOXFLAG states that flags may be included, though they are not required on "settlements and administrative subdivisions". Pages about streams, lakes, rivers, swamps, etc. are not allowed…this we are clear about. Can we discuss this, DJFlem, Alan, Magnolia, and Famartin? Also, miscommunication here: Talk:Port Johnson, New Jersey. Hopefully we can come to a resolution. Tinton5 (talk) 23:49, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Probably would have more luck getting people's attention by tagging everyone... Tinton5 Djflem Magnolia677‎ Alansohn And perhaps a more appropriate title for this section... OK, fixed both. Anyway... Maps are good. I think its more encyclopedic to have a state reference map since that makes Wikipedia more friendly to non-New Jersey readers (enhancing its global nature). In fact, I wish there was a USA inset on the New Jersey map to make it even more user-friendly, but I've never played around with .svg files so don't know how to add it. Maybe I'll try to figure it out. County maps are also helpful for those of us who are more local. I'm not sure about the rest of your backgrounds, but having lived both inside and outside NJ, I think both the state and county maps would be great. There seems to be a precedent for city neighborhoods that they include city maps with the neighborhood highlighted. Since this is precedent, I can go along with that, but that takes work (and I'd rather get all the GNIS locations into Wikipedia first before tackling that, so if someone wants me to do it... they're gonna be waiting a while. Maybe someone else has time). Of course, there is also the debate about what constitutes a city neighborhood vs. an unincorporated community. Technically in NJ, city neighborhoods ARE unincorporated communities. I didn't think much about maps til Magnolia mentioned it to me; since many unincorporated community articles are stubs, the two map combo seems to take up a lot of space so it initially seemed like overkill, but from an outsider perspective, it is helpful. Anyway, that's my $0.02. As mentioned, my priority right now is to rip as much out of GNIS as I can so you guys discuss, tag me if you want my input, otherwise just let me know what the decision is. Famartin (talk) 03:18, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
Well I, for one, am trying to create as many of those as possible, as well. I wasn't too sure how to tag people, but now I do. Tinton5 (talk) 23:19, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Removal of a redundant category

I have been following the lead of User:Tinton5 to remove a redundant category from several New Jersey articles. An example can be seen at Harrison, New Jersey. On that article, an editor has added the category "Harrison, New Jersey". Within that category is the child "people from Harrison, New Jersey". For this reason, retaining the category "people from Harrison, New Jersey" on the same article is redundant. After I removed the category "people from Harrison, New Jersey", an editor added it back, and masqueraded it as a "see also". My concern is that--in this case--it is redundant to keep the child category on the same article as the parent. Also, if the child category is to stay, it is not placed correctly. WP:CATDEF states clearly that "category declarations are placed at the end of the wikitext". Thank you for your input. Magnolia677 (talk) 16:02, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

See Talk:North_Bergen,_New_Jersey#RfC: Should the parent and child category both be added to this article? for a full discussion / rebuttal of the issue. Alansohn (talk) 19:48, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Distorted perception by relying on GNIS as reference

According to Wikipedia: "The Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) is a database that contains name and locative information about more than two million physical and cultural features located throughout the United States of America and its territories. It is a type of gazetteer."

Features

As the the above says, the GNIS refers to physical and cultural features & as GNIS itself clearly states, Populated (Community) Place (except those associated with facilities). Official common name for a populated location within an incorporated place. To use it to say that the names listed are communities is original research. It is cherry picking to run through the list and choose ones one finds convenient to call a "community" while ignoring others. Use of GNIS as a primary/secondary reference to call that name a unincorporated community while the GNIS is unclear about that raises questions about verifiability and reliability.

In the case of the Template:Bergen County, New Jersey, an editor, who appears unfamiliar with the geography of the county, has chosen to indiscriminately create stubs for rail infrastructure by calling them communities when they are clearly facilities or features. In other situations, such as Coytesville, New Jersey, the editor claims the place(name) "is" a community., whereas actually Coytesville "was" a community that has been incorporated in Fort Lee or at best, "is" the name of a former community that has become part of the town. S/he has provided no reference to say that the community still exists or that the name is still used, and thus is presenting a historical place(name) as contemporary place. Wikipedia uses the past tense of "to be" to describe historical locations as seen ion Five Points, Manhattan or Horseshoe, Jersey City or as in the case of Saltersville, New Jersey redirects to the present-day municipality.

Self-redirect/circular & notability

Addtionally, does it serve Wikipedia to create countless stubs based on a cherry-picked list compiled from GNIS. Do these all GNIS entries require a separate name page on Wikipedia? Who does it serves? when they could be easily re-directed and mentioned in township articles until such time as a fork, if ever, it becomes necessary (such as when there is significant historical or geographical information at the place or an event that took place there). Wikipedia:Notability, specifically Wikipedia:PAGEDECIDE discusses whether Wikipedia:STUB should be createad. As at least one other editor has suggested of the numerous stubs added to this template, These are not independently notable communities in modern Bergen County. They do not deserve articles. A parallel discussion there further elaborates. For example:

In addition to an area known as Mahwah Proper that is the township's center, other unincorporated communities, localities and place names within the township include include the residential areas of Ackermans Mills, Bear Swamp, Bogerts Ranch Estates, Cragmere, Cragmere Park, Darlington, Fardale, Halifax, Havemeyers Reservoir, Masonicus, Mountainside Farm, Pulis Mills, Ramapo Farm and Wanamakers Mills, along with the mixed residential and commercial area of West Mahwah.

How useful is it to send readers on a wild goose hunt? It borders of Wikipedia:SELFREDIRECT and Wikipedia:CIRCULAR, and as with the aforementioned Saltersville, a redirect to the municipality is much less time-consuming and effective. Djflem (talk) 10:52, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

For the most part, I think they should be removed or made as redirects to the actual entity the topic resides in. NJ doesn't have any unincorporated land. No need to waste the readers' time. Either remove them or point to a section of another article that explains the history of the entity. (Note: I was born, grew up, and spent a not insignificant portion of my adult life in Bergen County, including Montvale and Upper Saddle River. While I've heard of a few of these entity names, most are not known to me and I would bet that most are not known even to those living there.) - UtherSRG (talk) 15:41, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
I had raised this issue months ago at Talk:Fair Play, New Jersey, when Magnolia677 was creating the first the massive wave of articles for unincorporated communities. While I acknowledge that GNIS and NJ localities searches can be useful sources, they seem to fall extremely short in establishing notability. As Djflem and Oknazevad have pointed out, many of these places for which we have had articles created are nothing more than a reference to a train station or railroad junction. Even though every square inch of the state is part of an incorporated community, I do recognize that there are many neighborhoods and communities within communities -- what we effectively (if not fully accurately) call "unincorporated communities" for lack of a better term -- that merit their own articles. Yet I fully concur that the vast majority of these places do not merit articles and that the better solution is to allow them to grow as sections within their parent article. Without appropriate reliable and verifiable sources about these places -- far above and beyond GNIS -- there shouldn't be independent articles for these places. I hope that other editors, such as Famartin and Tinton5, will help develop a more coherent standard statewide for which places should have their own articles and which should not. Alansohn (talk) 15:57, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
My other concern is that I seriously question the independence of the two sources used to establish these articles. In short, I think the state place name lookup is really just a mirror of the GNIS database and therefore we really have only one source claiming these names. Some also use Google maps as a source, and I know for a fact that those are just the same at GNIS entries placed on their maps. (Considering the sheer number of corrections I've personally submitted to Google about pretty obviously wrong things, I wonder if any of their labels are reliable!) either way, what we have here is single-source articles that rely on a source of questionable reliability and appropriateness for establishing notability. Already I've seen multiple articles created for what are clearly, and citably, the same place, just older names. That's why GNIS is of so questionable reliability. All it does is compile names that may have appeared on a map once, even if it never got used again. It's really not a useful source, and certainly does nothing to establish actual existence of these supposed unincorporated communities. oknazevad (talk) 19:19, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

At Elizabeth, New Jersey#Districts and neighborhoods, Perth Amboy, New Jersey #Community, & North Bergen, New Jersey#Geography one sees the efficacy & efficiency (as well as established practice) of keeping all nieghborhoods in the main municipality page, and only linking to those where there is substantive, referenced article.This affords a better comprehensive overview of the geography of a place than a simple dictionary mention stub of dubious merit (and in the case of many, dubious referencing).Djflem (talk) 20:12, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

What is the difference between neighborhoods and unincorporated communities

We have structures for Category:Neighborhoods in Jersey City, New Jersey, Category:Neighborhoods in Newark, New Jersey and Category:Neighborhoods in Cherry Hill, New Jersey, but in other places we have categories for unincorporated communities. I agree that the terms neighborhood and unincorporated community overlap to some degree, but when is a place a neighborhood and when is it an unincorporated community? Any thoughts on a definition? Alansohn (talk) 19:48, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

"Unincorporated community" is a technical term that isn't used in common parlance; its nearly as irrelevant to the average Joe as the term "census-designated place" is. Most locations which are technically called "CDP's" or "Unincorporated communities" are termed "towns", "villages", "hamlets", "sections" or "neighborhoods" by the average Joe, depending on their size and the character of the area. "Unincorporated community" is technically what any of these communities are. Perhaps using the more common term as the word in text, but linking it to the NJ definition of unincorporated community, would be best. Famartin (talk) 20:18, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
Beyond the difference between the equally imprecise neighborhood and unincorporated community, or more specifically unincorporated community in New Jersey there are one many terms that one can and does use to describe any of the smaller divisions that are part of one the municipalities in New Jersey such as district, section, part, ward, area that are in common usage and local parlance, all of which are much more popular than "incorporated community". Any definition is influenced by any number of perspectives that include political, statistical, geographical, historical, and cultural facts and perceptions about how a toponym issued.

Neighborhood seem to be more urban and is consistent with Wikipedia common use when discussing cities including NJ's traditional "Big Six" (Nwk, JC, Pat, Eliz, Camden, Trenton) and/or, for lack of a collective description "traditional, historical small/mid-size" municipalities (Atlantic City, Asbury, New Brunswick, Hackensack, Perth Amboy, Passaic, Clifton) as well as the state's highly urbanized areas such as the Hudson Waterfront and Greater Newark (Essex/Hudson), home to the nation's most densely populated places. Perhaps the same could be said of the Mercer and Camden/Gloucester agglomerations.

In urban sprawl Jersey the definition seems harder to discern or intuit. If one looks at places in NJ's fastest growing high population/density centers, whose land-use patterns are not traditional urban core/suburban/rural, notably in central part of the state, such as Toms River/Lakewood conglomerations or the Woodbridge/Edison concentration. How does one refer to the divisions of these "non-tradtional", edge cities"? Are they neighborhoods? Are they communities?

Some considerations:

  • CDPS A Census designated place is by definition an unincorporated communities, To include unincorporated communities in an opening description in an article about them is redundant.
  • Ethnic enclaves While Ducktown, Little India, Little Lima, and Koreatowns are/were gathered around ethnic "communities" they tend to be geographically "neighborhoods" in urbanized places, such as NJ's traditional Big Six, (Nwk, JC, Pat, Eliz, Camd & Trent) and smaller "city" cities (AC, NB, Hackensack, Asbury, Perth Amboy etc) and continous urban areas such as the Hudson Waterfront and Greater Newark.
  • Property associations, named housing developments, gated "communities" For example, Llewellyn Park, Radburn, and part of Harmon Cove generally are called "communities".
  • Shore, lake, or resort "communities" Common usage and local parlance tend to speak of such places as communities. For example, Long Beach Township include the Long Beach Island communities of Beach Haven Crest, Beach Haven Gardens, Beach Haven Inlet, Beach Haven Park, Beach Haven Terrace, Brant Beach, Brighton Beach, Haven Beach, High Bar Harbor, Holgate, Loveladies, North Beach, Peahala Park, South Beach Haven, Spray Beach, and the Dunes.
  • Historic districts are precisely defined municipal divisions that can and often do characterize a broader geographic division.

New Jersey templates

See WP:REFUND where many New Jersey redirects such as {{NJ-stub}} are under discussion -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 03:36, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Something of interest to the members of this project

The members of this project may be interested in a discussion on the AN/I noticeboard, where an interaction ban between two editors of New Jersey-related articles is being considered. The thread can be found here. Unfortunately, it's fairly long at this point, and is in three sections. BMK (talk) 04:25, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

New Jersey towns, section order

(Copy-pasted from Alansohn (talk)): I believe that the section order in these town articles should be re-standardized - although you may be involved in local government, most readers are not likely to be concerned at all with local government and politics on a day-to-day basis. On the other hand, the average reader is far more likely to be concerned with the issues of education and transportation. Best, Castncoot (talk) 07:04, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

  • Castncoot, we probably would benefit from re-standardizing the order of sections in municipal articles. Given that there is a standard to be re-standardized, we should probably leave that standard unchanged until we have consensus on a new standard. While it does not establish a policy in any way shape or form, WP:USCITIES does provide some optional suggestions that place the sections in order by Government, Education and Transportation. Pending any effort to re-standardize, you can self-revert or I will be happy to undo the changes. Alansohn (talk) 01:51, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Alansohn, if the standard was designed by previous consensus, then by all means revert to this standard pending a new consensus. On the other hand, if the standard was essentially self-designed by you, then I think we should move the ball forward right away and move Government (or at least Politics, if you're willing to tease that out of Government) farther down the totem pole compared to more salient issues including Education and Transportation. I surmise that the average reader wouldn't want Politics of all topics to be placed as high up as it is in many of the New Jersey town articles and may in fact find this to be an embarrassing shortcoming for these articles. I think you've otherwise done a fabulous job on these articles, I must note - I simply believe that this one issue unfortunately impedes greatly their potential for being even more superior. Best, Castncoot (talk)
    • Castncoot, I understand your efforts to consider reordering sections in these articles. I'm sure that I had something to do with the establishment of the order in the article for Allendale and elsewhere in the state, but this order has been based on guidance elsewhere. Whether you take a look at the suggestions in WP:USCITIES or at featured articles such as Boston, the order of Government, followed by Education, followed by Transportation is followed. I'm sure that there are better ways to do this, but the best way to do this is by reaching consensus and leaving the article in the pre-existing order until that new consensus is reached. Finding featured articles and guidelines that match your preferred order would add weight to your argument for a change in consensus. Alansohn (talk) 03:02, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
We are, in part, limited to those areas where we have data/information. The abundance of accessible information regarding local government organization tends to weigh this area heavily. Liz Read! Talk! 02:25, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
This is an interesting discussion. Alansohn, I had also looked at WP:USCITIES myself, and to be honest, all three (Government, Education, and Transportation) are downgraded according to this guideline (just a guideline, and one with which I have several disagreements and which is geared toward large cities, in any case). The guideline also suggests mentioning something about local politics within government, but again, specifically for larger cities. Therefore, WP:USCITIES appears to be tremendously unhelpful here, for smallish New Jersey towns. I think we need to use simple common sense and good judgement here. The average reader looking up Allendale, New Jersey is more likely to be interested in its demographics, educational system(s), and public and/or road and highway access before he or she contemplates the name of the current mayor or councilmembers. Castncoot (talk) 03:35, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
I agree that WP:USCITIES is highly flawed, but it is intended to be a guide to the organization of articles about places of all sizes. I'm sure that you have your perceptions as to what readers want to know about in what order, as do I. The best way to resolve this is through consensus, using featured articles and relevant guidelines as a model. Alansohn (talk) 03:40, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Are there many Featured Articles on small towns? If so, I agree they could be a relevant guideline for consensus, and I also agree we should strive to reach a consensus. Otherwise, an alternative might be to contemplate what one might look for in the website city-data.com. Also, the fact is that there is readily available information about the names of school board members of these towns' school districts - the average reader is likely to be just as disinterested in these names as well. Education, Transportation, and Government thus speak for themselves, but the politics associated with Education or Government (or the Transportation department, for that matter) are far less important, although certainly worth mentioning, when dealing with these smallish towns, from this perspective. Castncoot (talk) 04:00, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
I encourage you to find examples of articles that support your case and make your case to change the current consensus at WP:USCITIES used across the nation. Alansohn (talk) 04:10, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
No problem. See Allendale. In Michigan, that is. Also, when or where was consensus reached to apply the WP:USCITIES guideline to New Jersey's town articles? And was that in fact, followed, when it directed politics to be geared toward larger cities, not smallish towns in New Jersey? Are school board members' names then listed in New Jersey town articles' Government sections? Questions to contemplate. Castncoot (talk) 04:53, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
So we should base consensus in New Jersey on an article for somewhere in Michigan that is unincorporated so it has no government? When was that consensus made? Please raise the issue at WT:NJ and make your best case for why this should be the model. I wish you the best of luck. Alansohn (talk) 04:57, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Actually, please look up Allendale Charter Township in Michigan, as you were the one who suggested looking at articles across the US. At the time of this writing, there isn't even a Government section, even though there is a government, as stated in the infobox. On the other hand, the Education section directly follows Demographics. I've also noticed that no other state's municipalities' Government section carries as much material as in New Jersey - but this goes against WP:USCITIES, which again, you seem to be relying on, albeit partially and selectively. I also don't believe I have any burden here, because I don't believe an applicable consensus was ever reached for New Jersey towns, which mostly have < 100K in population - while the spirit and intent of the very roughly and poorly designed WP:USCITIES is clearly aimed at big cities. Castncoot (talk) 11:32, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Being that no applicable consensus has ever been reached then, I would simply point out that this is indeed a golden opportunity to quickly build for the first time a consensus for a laudable template for New Jersey town articles and to call it WP:NJCITIES. Perhaps it could be ordered as such:
  • Lede
  • History
  • Geography
  • Demographics
  • Education
  • Transportation
  • Economy
  • Government
  • Public services
  • Politics
  • Culture
  • Notable residents
  • See also
  • References
  • External links

As you notice, Government is getting its fair play in this list, using the perspective of criteria as would be ranked in terms of mundane, day-to-day concerns of inhabitants of New Jersey suburban towns, who incorporate vastly different concerns from those in large cities. The average citizen has to travel every day, for example, many to New York City or Philadelphia, and a large percentage if not a majority in these smallish suburban towns have school-aged children; on the other hand, the average citizen is not showing up in council chambers each day, nor do government decisions in small towns match the attention received by every word uttered or every move ordered by the mayor of a big city, nor is there generally a plurality of single people in these towns for whom public education is not as prominent an issue. If one can make the reasonable assumption that readers of New Jersey town articles want to get an authentic "flavor" of a given town itself, then IMHO, this list is sensible. Best, Castncoot (talk) 12:06, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

  • I guess we have three choices here. We can adopt WP:USCITIES as a standard; We can use the de facto consensus standard used in articles for New Jersey that has been established over the past dozen years; or we can follow your proposed standard (for which I cannot understand separating Government and Politics into two discrete sections). While USCITIES is not policy, it does provide a model of section orders used across the nation and in featured articles. Sure Allendale, New Jersey isn't Boston. But neither is Newark, Jersey City or New Jersey, yet I'm confident that these are full-fledged cities. There are Teterboro and Tavistock at the smallest end of New Jersey municipalities, but where would we draw the line in the List of municipalities in New Jersey between large cities and those subject to your proposed NJCITIES? Where do Atlantic City and Hackensack cities with 40,000-odd residents fit in, and what about Neptune City (a borough with about 5,000 residents) or Corbin City (a city with 500 or so people). As to content of sections, we can search the nation for the lowest quality articles and gut New Jersey articles to match the lowest standard or we could work to encourage editors in Michigan and elsewhere to be far more thorough and complete following the standard we've set here. Think it through, modify your structure as needed, and make your best case at WT:NJ. I am rather leery of the proposal, But I am more than happy to abide by whatever formal consensus is established through this process. Alansohn (talk) 13:49, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Glad to see this forum progressing in a positive discussion and rapidly so, Alansohn (talk). I think reasonable people can work pretty quickly. First, let me say that the Michigan article simply represented an exaggerated counterexample; obviously I don't believe that any town with a government should or can be devoid of a Government section, and my proposed list order above includes Government squarely in the middle. Likewise, I believe WP:USCITIES is awful, you have acknowledged that is flawed yourself, and I suspect that it's also caused many town article editors to shun it across the country. Choices would be to include all municipalities in New Jersey which come with the title "City" alone (there must be a mere ten or fifteen of them, perhaps, compared to over 500 townships and boroughs?-you would know better than I) under WP:USCITIES (which I don't favor), or to place ALL towns AND cities under the new WP:NJCITIES template. You yourself acknowledged at the outset of this discussion that the de facto status quo is also not acceptable, so it would be frankly hypocritical to maintain an unacceptable product. Finally, I have deliberately proposed making Politics a separate section because I believe that we as editors must have insight and responsibility when informing the reader to separate essential governmental services, such as the structure of a town's government and its police and fire protection, from comparatively non-essential information, including the names and political affiliations of current councilmembers. I don't mind transporting this same discussion to WP:NJ, will do so per your suggestion. Best, Castncoot (talk) 17:05, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Whether WP:USCITIES is great or sucks, the last thing Wikipedia needs is 50 different city article standards in the USA. Yes, most likely we won't see 50, but this is ripe for getting out of control in the future as other states decide to do it, then it will incrementally turn into a big mess for everyone to keep track of the differences. Though I primarily edit states in the midwest, I've touched city articles in numerous states, and I sure don't want to learn numerous city article formats. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 00:10, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
That's WP:BALL and also really isn't rational. If something is broken, you have to fix it. By the way, have you ever edited a single New Jersey town article? Also, just FYI, the current de facto standard in New Jersey is not WP:USCITIES; and since you edit primarily midwestern town articles, please note that Allendale Charter Township, Michigan; Allendale, Michigan; and Allendale, Missouri all do not resemble the WP:USCITIES template in the least. Best, Castncoot (talk) 02:43, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
If you are looking for an article about a town closer to New Jersey, check out Briarcliff Manor, New York. It is also a relatively small village, and is located in Westchester County, not too far from New Jersey. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 03:06, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
I was bored and talk page stalking enough to find this, so I'll comment. I used USCities to the tee while forming the Briarcliff article, and I thought it worked really well. I'm happy with the sections and their titles and orders, and was able to find useful information relevant to each section heading, except sister cities (as such small towns typically have none). I'd recommend the USCities guideline for all New York and New Jersey municipality articles, big towns or small.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 03:56, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
For unincorporated areas that therefore aren't municipalities, I have less experience. I wrote articles on the NY hamlets of Archville and Eastview, neither of which are big or important enough to have sources that I can use to fill in sections on population, geography, or other information. I would still believe USCities works as long as you omit government and demographics sections (the latter unless it's a CDP) and maybe a few others as needed. A more specific template can be developed, probably pretty easily, as long as consensus is reached.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 04:02, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
I'm glad we're attracting a good discussion here. Converting to the USCITIES format would take a drastic change from the current status quo. It would involve adding Arts, Culture, Tourism, Sports, and Parks and Recreation all BEFORE Government and Politics. The current de facto status quo standard, and simply for consistency, randomly picking out another New Jersey town article starting with the letter "A" - namely Allamuchy Township, New Jersey - if everyone could please take a look at this, what springs out immediately with New Jersey town articles is how much relative weight is given to Government and Politics, ahead of Education and Transportation - one will find this to be consistent across most New Jersey town articles and is simply not the case with the Town articles of any other state I looked at (about 10 states, I randomly chose). Therein, I compiled the above list as not too drastic a change from the current status quo, yet one which seems to make sense, at least from this perspective. What do people think of the above list anyway? Also, any suggestions with regard to this list order? Castncoot (talk) 05:32, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
I concur with User:Ɱ that the WP:USCITIES model will work best. USCITIES merely provides a model of the sections and how they should be ordered. It does not require that each section exist and it specifies that there is room for local changes. As we've modified it here in New Jersey, we seem to have an effective middle ground. I think that any changes for New Jersey should focus on tweaks rather than a redesign. Alansohn (talk) 06:10, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Thank you, yeah that is true about the USCities guideline. Castncoot, wouldn't you prefer all those sections you listed that relay more unique aspects of the area to be above government and politics, which (at least in the NJ ones I've seen so far) are usually far from unique and appear to be far too long and detailed when comparing that section to the rest of the article? So I'm confused if that was a complaint about using USCities because the above list has government really far down. And as for the above list, I agree with most of it, though I think politics should be a subsection of government and seeing as transportation often involves public services, at least putting the sections next to each other if not sub-set might be a good idea.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 14:31, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Ok, so let me just clarify with what I'm hearing from User:Ɱ - he or she believes that the Government and Politics sections are too long, too high up in the article, and far from unique. I would have to agree there. If this is the case, then the Government and Politics sections need to be trimmed, and some of the other sections (including Arts and Culture) need to be put ahead of Government. Do we have a consensus here? Castncoot (talk) 15:34, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
So based upon what we've heard here, there appears to be a general (albeit not unanimous) consensus to follow WP:USCITIES and to reduce the size of Government sections. Alansohn, if it would be possible for you to kindly start trimming the Government sections, that would be greatly appreciated - I agree that the Government and Politics sections are primarily weighing down the New Jersey town articles. If you're not able to do it alone, I would be happy to help when I am able. As User:Ɱ notes, there are plenty of interesting sections which WP:USCITIES (as favored by you and others here) wants to precede Government, including Arts and Culture, which the current de facto status quo has backwards, so that will need to be fixed as well. Best, Castncoot (talk) 02:05, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
First off, we are free to tweak WP:USCITIES, as it has no value as policy, but it is something that we should use as a starting point if there are any tweaks that would work better here. Next, I'm not sure what is "weighing down" what in the government section, but let's discuss. I've seen other New Jersey articles, such as the one for Bergen County, New Jersey, which is rather heavily weighed down with details of every ethnic group that's ever stepped foot in the county in the 16 subsections dedicated to community diversity, but the best way to do address that issue is to add more weight to the other sections to counterbalance the excesses in demographic details, such as in education and arts and culture. I'd suggest the same in municipal articles, unless there are specific suggestions as to what is given excessive weight here. Alansohn (talk) 17:30, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Let's start with Allamuchy Township, New Jersey. I've placed Culture ahead of Government, as WP:USCITIES clearly directs. As far the Government section goes, it alone covers roughly 40-45% of the (pre-references) text!!! As User:Ɱ pointed out, the Government sections here are not uniquely notable; at least more notability would justify more weight and more text. And the story is similar throughout hundreds of other New Jersey town articles. Are Warren County's Board of Freeholders really needed in this and every other Warren County municipality page? I think not, as it should suffice simply to have that information in the Warren County, New Jersey article. Likewise, the town's 2004 and 2008 presidential election results are outdated and represent an inappropriate waste of space in this as well as hundreds of other New Jersey town articles. Also keep in mind that the 2016 election is right around the corner. Perhaps at the Warren County level, 2004 and 2008 could be more pertinent, but at the town article level, I believe that this represents an overweight. WP:USCITIES affirms this philosophy as follows: "For larger cities, you might include information on the local government politics as well." I don't want my comments to undermine in any way the fabulously informative work that you've accomplished over the years, Alansohn, but I'm simply trying to find a way to reduce the Government/Politics section to closer to, let's say, 25-30% of the (pre-references) text. Yes, culture and other sections need to be expanded as well, but then again, that's far easier done at the County article level than at the level of a small municipality's article, given the limited scope of content to provide these other section topics. Best, Castncoot (talk) 17:30, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
I have to agree, especially when it comes to that county paragraph. I also find that the census paragraphs are way too large here. I usually remove the outdated information (in this case, the 2000 census). Parts of it could/should be reformatted into a historical demographics subsection, but as it is it looks rather pasted-in and the reader would expend too much effort comparing this meager ten-year difference.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 17:37, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Totally agree about the 2000 census info, I've removed it. It's 2015 now, and data from 2000 is no more useful than from 1990 at this point. Castncoot (talk) 17:51, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Okay, so in the spirit of what the three main participants in this discussion have expressed, I have tweaked the Allamuchy Township, New Jersey and Brigantine, New Jersey pages as follows: 1) reordered sections as per WP:USCITIES, 2) removed outdated 2000 Census paragraphs and lede mentions of 1990 Census data, rescuing orphaned refs, and 3) removed from Government and Politics outdated election results as well as non-municipal personalities, while providing convenient wikilinks to higher level government jurisdictions. The Government section is still very prominent but carries a much more pertinent and notable role now in these articles. (There was an edit conflict in the 2012 presidential election results within the Allamuchy page, and I removed the material which was error-prone per erroneous percentage calculations). I hope that Alansohn will synthesize another template now to this effect to provide a convenient transformation of the New Jersey town article genre. I think that we have collectively made a real improvement here with this municipal genre through this discussion and it has been a pleasure, thanks. Best, Castncoot (talk) 20:17, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

New: Consistency for articles: State/county maps

A lot of articles related to NJ are not consistent, where some have state-level maps, others don't (they just have county maps), the Unincorporated communities in NJ category, where there has been a long debate about whether or not this was appropriate, and other general formatting standardization. For the maps, I believe just having the county-level map is sufficient. Thoughts? Tinton5 (talk) 16:26, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

The "infobox settlement" template makes room for several kinds of maps, including pushpin maps. Pushpin maps are more widely used on articles across the United States. What one editor sees as "consistency", others may see as limiting expression. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:49, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Agree. County level maps are more than sufficient. State maps are redundant where there is a county map since it includes a state map inset, besides being unnecessarily space consuming. As has been pointed out elsewhere, much work has been done to raise the standard in NJ articles by assigning county level maps, which is not the case in most US articles.Djflem (talk) 06:57, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I want to make sure I am understanding this correctly. I find the state map inset extraordinarily valuable, even if it takes up a little extra space. It really gives a perspective of where a town lies in the state of New Jersey, not just in a county. I shouldn't have to mentally extrapolate where a town lies regarding its relative location in the state, clicking back and forth between the town article and its parent county article to do this - that's just awkward and clumsy. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding what is being asked, however. To clarify myself, as an example, I really like what the Allamuchy Township, New Jersey infobox looks like with respect to this particular issue, because I can immediately see where Allamuchy lies both within Warren County and within New Jersey itself. Best, Castncoot (talk) 15:53, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

The maps being discussed are here and here, as used for example, Coytesville, New Jersey the latter of which is very large and different from the format used in Allamuchy Township, which has one format used. Fort Lee, New Jersey offers another solution to specify county and state location without taking up so much space, showing the town within the county, and the county within the state.Djflem (talk) 19:38, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

I do indeed like the Fort Lee format the best, as it not only shows the town within the county and the county within the state, but also the relative position of the town with respect to other towns in the county, for example where Fort Lee would meet Englewood Cliffs. I also agree that the second state map consumes excessive space in the Coytesville case and is redundant there. Castncoot (talk) 20:48, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
The state pushpin map is definitely redundant.. I think at least 3 agree so. The county level pushpin map is more than satisfying. There is already an inset of the state, already mentioned above. We don't want the box to be cluttered. Tinton5 (talk) 20:06, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Same here. One map per page is enough and almost all of the maps we have provide a detailed county-level map with a corresponding state map showing the location of the county. An extra state map is unneeded. Alansohn (talk) 21:58, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Since consensus has at least 3 people that feel the extra map is unnecessary, I am going to be bold and start taking down the redundant maps for unincorporated communities. Alan, are you adding flag icons to each page as well? Tinton5 (talk) 23:28, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • I feel the state map is redundant if a county map is present. The infoboxes are too big as it is and stretch into the body of the article. Can we do anything to control the ever-increasing size of these municipal infoboxes? --JackTheVicar (talk) 15:12, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

County category discussion

A county category discussion which would affect this project is taking place at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2015 April 27#Counties of the United States Djflem (talk) 19:33, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Former/historical towns categorozation

At Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy there is a discussion with regard to categoriszation] relevant to this project, regarding:

Those places which are clearly municipalities have been shifted to that category. Remaining are historical villages which were once part of various other governmental/geographic divisions.Djflem (talk) 20:32, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Elizabeth Falcons listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Elizabeth Falcons to be moved to Falcons-Warsaw. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 23:03, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Categorization of unincorporated communities in New Jersey

Categorization on Wikipedia follows the below hierarchy:

Can you please correct the Category:Stub-Class New Jersey articles you have created by placing them in the correct Category:Unincorporated communities in New Jersey by county and removing the parent Category:Unincorporated communities in New Jersey tag? Thanks. Djflem (talk) 09:58, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

I wasn't putting anything in that category until User:Thewildone85 (talk) came through and put them all in there. So... yeah, why'd he do that? Famartin (talk) 10:18, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
Well, clearly he's not alone in adding them if one looks at a brief sampling, such as Ewing (unincorporated community), New Jersey and Croton, New Jersey which you created. Since you know better than anyone which stubs you have created you can at a minimum at least do the ones to which you added the incorrect category, and even better the ones to which User:Thewildone85 added it.Djflem (talk) 10:33, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
As I said, after he came through and added all the ones I made to that state level cat, it seemed like there was some reason for me to add the new ones I did as well. How about we find out why Thewildone85 (talk) did it all. Because, quite frankly, I'm not eager to go back and fix everything. Or, better yet, maybe you can go fix it if it bothers you so. Because it doesn't bother me that much either way. Famartin (talk) 10:57, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
User:Djflem, I'm still new here so I may have missed it, but where was it written--or consensus agreed to--that "categorization on Wikipedia follows" the criteria you wrote above? Because not all editors are following it, and some editors--yourself included--are actively deleting the state category (I asked you about this on your talk page, but you didn't respond). I wrote to User:Hmains--who I believe has expertise in categorization--a while ago to get advise on this, see here. My feeling from edits in other places is that there is tremendous value to the users (not editors) of Wikipedia from having at least a category link to both the county and state level. Having a "master list" of all the unincorporated communities in a state is extremely useful, and the only way to get it is by adding that category link to each unincorporated community. Without it, a user of Wikipedia would need to search through each county to compare unincorporated communities (pretty onerous in a state like Texas). I completely support multi-level categorization--it helps the end user. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:27, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

If you view Category:Geography of New Jersey you will see the pattern of how towns, cities, neighborhoods, follow a hierarchy. That precedent also holds for Category:Geography of Texas and has been developed over many years through Wikipedia:EDITCONSENSUS. While you cite the rogue effort of one user Thewildone85 (who doesn't have the decency to have talk page) to run through Category:Unincorporated communities in the United States and add the parent by state category to you also seem to be suggesting by the same rationale that Category:High schools in New Jersey should include every high school in the the state, and that every Category:Churches in New Jersey should include every church in the state, and that every Category:Boroughs in New Jersey should include every borough in the state. Are you? If so, why? Why should any of them included? Why should there be any exception for unincorporated communities? I don't believe there'd be much support for dismantling the neighbourhood, city, county, state, country pattern by throwing everything in one category that someone seems to prefer and ignoring a established hierarchy. Djflem (talk) 18:05, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure what the "geography of New Jersey" or churches and schools has to do with this discussion, unless your point is to distract others so they don't notice you didn't answer my question. I randomly chose two places in Texas, Posey, Texas, and Midkiff, Texas, and they both have category links to the county and the state. This is the pattern on Wikipedia for all states. It's very useful for the users of Wikipedia to have one "grand list" of unincorporated communities. Magnolia677 (talk) 20:31, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Sorry if you are confused. As you've said, your new here, so I gave you some tips for familiarizing yourself with how categories work, particularly with geography, since unincorporated communities are part of main Category:Geography of New Jersey, which I hope you'll see & agree. (The above examples re both cases of a parent category not being removed when a new category was added.) I'll explain again.

The reason why the answer is NO because each individual borough, town, and city is part of another category in the hierarchy, for example Category:Boroughs in New Jersey by county. Now my question, Why should incorporated communities be individually listed in a parent categories when larger "real" administrative subdivisions are not? Djflem (talk) 22:28, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Let's use you're your example of "category:Cities in New Jersey". Did you know the Garden State is the ONLY STATE in the US that doesn't individually list each city? Just look at "Category:Cities in the United States by state". Notice the ONE EXCEPTION?? Of course, you could argue that adding places (ie. "Foo, New Jersey") to both a child (the county) and parent (the state of New Jersey) contravenes WP:SUBCAT. Though clearly, the editors in the 49 states outside New Jersey are willing to bend the rules to achieve the positive results. If we are truly here to serve the users of Wikipedia, and not just the editors, then adding parent and child cats in this case is a no-brainer. Alpha lists of all cities, all towns, all unincorporated places are invaluable, and can only be achieved by adding parent and child cats to individual city/town articles. I'm not buying this snake oil. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:20, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

And the no-brainer by extension means that Category:High schools in New Jersey should contain every high school in New Jersey and Category:Churches in New Jersey should contain every church in New Jersey? Djflem (talk) 23:51, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

  • I don't edit much on church articles, so you can do what you like. Having a master list of all churches in New Jersey would be useful though. All I remember of church is Peter 3:9 "do not repay evil with evil or insult with insult, but with blessing, because to this you were called so that you may inherit a blessing." Magnolia677 (talk) 22:26, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

I have to say that Djflem has expressed the issue much as I would have. The purpose of categories is to provide a navigation tool for readers and editors to maneuver around through articles that share a common characteristic. Categories that are too small aren't useful and categories that are too large are just as bad. Per WP:CLN, categories coexist with lists and navigation templates, all of which are used here. The structures for Category:Boroughs in New Jersey, Category:Cities in New Jersey, Category:Townships in New Jersey and Category:Census-designated places in New Jersey allow readers / editors to navigate through the structure by county or by a number of other characteristics. Within Category:Unincorporated communities in New Jersey are substructures for CDPs, neighborhoods and other unincorporated communities. Throwing all of the 666 of the states unincorporated communities (or the 1,727 in Kentucky, 2,064 in California, 2,660 in Virginia or 2,916 in West Virginia!?!?!) only makes for a useless potpourri that serves no one. Alansohn (talk) 02:02, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

You think? A while back I needed to find an unincorporated community in Mississippi, where I've made many edits. I wasn't looking for a city, town, or even a hamlet. No, I specifically needed to find an unincorporated community, by alpha order (and I can't recall just why, but this really is a true story). GNIS was no help, because it wasn't specific enough in its search perimeters. Thank goodness User:Hmains had added both the parent and child categories across the USA (except New Jersey, as we know). It's sad to see those Mississippi, Arkansas and West Virginia articles taking the lead over the Garden State in this respect, but so it goes. For the end user of Wikipedia--a student, for example, doing a research paper about types of communities and who is looking for a specific list of unincorporated places--it really is a big help. Anyway, that's my 2 cents about why to add the parent cat. I haven't heard an equally good reason not to though. Who cares if the category is too big. If it's useful to the users of the encyclopedia, that's all that should matter, right? Magnolia677 (talk) 22:48, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
If I may jump in, I think there should be a category for the unincorporated communities in New Jersey. I don't see any reason why the category should not exist. True the category would get larger, but if we put everything in alphabetical order, it should not be too hard to navigate. If other states like Texas, which are much bigger than New Jersey, have a category for unincorporated communities, then so should New Jersey. I would create subcategories such as list of unincorporated places in New Jersey by category in order to organize the list more, as this would limit the length of the category to a reasonable length. It may take a lot of work, but in the end it will be worth it. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 02:38, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Ah so PointsofNoReturn agrees to include this category. Check the new discussion below. Tinton5 (talk) 16:29, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
PontNoPoint says "I would create subcategories such as list of unincorporated places in New Jersey by category in order to organize the list more, as this would limit the length of the category to a reasonable length". which is exactly what following by county does.Djflem (talk) 03:49, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

By extension, that would indicate that Category:High schools in New Jersey should contain every high school in New Jersey and Category:Churches in New Jersey should contain every church in New Jersey. Is that true? If not, why here? Why then stop at state and not include every community in the USA alphabetically listed in Category:Unincorporated communities in the United States? Djflem (talk) 20:41, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

From User talk:PointsofNoReturn#Question/clarification where I had asked for clarification of statement made above.
I think that organizing unincorporated communities by county would be a good idea, and then within the counties alphabetize the names of the communities. That would make the category easy to navigate. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 13:54, 27 May 2015 (UTC) Djflem (talk) 20:05, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Well then maybe we need to revise some of the policies in place regarding categorization nationwide. "Churches" in Nebraska, Hawaii, Any State; "Restaurants" in New Jersey, Ohio, Etc., "Hotels", Hospitals, Golf Courses, etc. They all exist. Tinton5 (talk) 21:52, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Copyright Violation Detection - EranBot Project

A new copy-paste detection bot is now in general use on English Wikipedia. Come check it out at the EranBot reporting page. This bot utilizes the Turnitin software (ithenticate), unlike User:CorenSearchBot that relies on a web search API from Yahoo. It checks individual edits rather than just new articles. Please take 15 seconds to visit the EranBot reporting page and check a few of the flagged concerns. Comments welcome regarding potential improvements. These likely copyright violations can be searched by WikiProject categories. Use "control-f" to jump to your area of interest (if such a copyvio is present).--Lucas559 (talk) 16:00, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

help needed: where is "Union, NJ" ?

Hey, New Jerseyites: Editors often put Union, NJ into articles, but that goes to a disambiguation page, Union Township, New Jersey. Which currently offers Union Township, Hunterdon County, New Jersey first. My impression is that Union Township, Union County, New Jersey is far more likely what is meant. Or maybe Union County, New Jersey.

So, which is meant, most often? Always or just usually? a) Union Township, Union County b) Union County c) Union Township, Hunterdon County

(And specific help is needed too: articles currently with ambiguous "Union, NJ" or "Union, New Jersey" are:

)

Thanks for your attention! --doncram 00:02, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Most commonly, this will be Union Township, Union County, New Jersey. It could be Union Township, Hunterdon County, New Jersey, very rarely Union County, New Jersey and (at least for Nikos Galis) it was Union City, New Jersey. It usually takes looking at the sources to see which Union is being referenced. Alansohn (talk) 03:20, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Potential meet up?

This may sound nuts, but could this project do a meet up somewhere? Maybe in Princeton or by the shore. This way we can collaborate ideas in person and get to see who we are actually editing with. I've seen on other projects here do it, so I figured that I'd inquire about it. Tinton5 (talk) 21:45, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

  • It would be worth the drive just to meet everyone in person. This place looks good. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:29, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Sure it would! Tinton5 (talk) 20:47, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
That place looks exquisite. I must read more about it.

Suggestion

Hello all! I was curious if anyone else thought it might be a good idea to make a (nonbinding) guideline on how all the individual US state WikiProjects should organize themselves, to help standardize them. I originally put this suggestion in the WikiProject United States talk page, so feel free to look there if you're interested. It's pretty empty though; basically all they said was to see what each of the individual projects thought about it. Please tell me if you have any concerns with this idea; hopefully we can find a way for everyone to love it! Also, I'm new at making proposals, so please forgive me if I do anything silly. :) Hope that you like this idea! JonathanHopeThisIsUnique (talk) 04:56, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Pride

You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride!

  • What? Wiki Loves Pride, a campaign to document and photograph LGBT culture and history, including pride events
  • When? June 2015
  • How can you help?
    1.) Create or improve LGBT-related articles and showcase the results of your work here
    2.) Upload photographs or other media related to LGBT culture and history, including pride events, and add images to relevant Wikipedia articles; feel free to create a subpage with a gallery of your images (see examples from last year)
    3.) Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)

Or, view or update the current list of Tasks. This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. Visit the group's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome!

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's main talk page.


Thanks, and happy editing!

User:Another Believer and User:OR drohowa

Pulaski Skyway listed at FAR

I have nominated Pulaski Skyway for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Imzadi 1979 → 01:51, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Requested articles

Hinduism in New Jersey is now a real article it can be removed from the requested articles list. --Have a great day :) , Sanjev Rajaram (talk) 19:19, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

So removed. Thanks !! oknazevad (talk) 19:36, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

New Jersey Transit

I've started a discussion regarding this article's title. Input is requested and welcome. oknazevad (talk) 01:10, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Opinion on my article Township Act of 1798

A few months ago, I created the page Township Act of 1798. I would like to see some feedback on it. Winterysteppe (talk) 04:43, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Consistency on naming

Hi, I noticed that the names of towns are very varied. Some have the word township in it. Some do not. Let me give an example. West Milford, New Jersey is a township but Warren Township, New Jersey does. Its a bit inconsistent. Can the wikiproject members decide on consistency? TheDwellerCamp (talk) 03:38, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

The consistency already exists. It's WP:COMMONNAME. The title should only contain "township" if it's actually used in the day to day name of the town, or if it's needed to disambiguate the title. (In case you didn't know, all New Jersey municipalities are incorporated, and all of New Jersey is part of an incorporated municipality. Unlike other states, townships is New Jersey don't contain other, lower tier municipalities, and whether a municipality is known as "town", "village", "borough", "township" or even "city" is more a historical artifact than a meaningful distinction. oknazevad (talk) 03:52, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
The other issue is potential conflicts, such as paired municipalities like Chatham Borough, New Jersey / Chatham Township, New Jersey, or the multiple places named Washington Township, New Jersey. Alansohn (talk) 03:58, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Well, I did say disambiguation. oknazevad (talk) 04:57, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Here is how i understand it. The WP:COMMONNAME says what is most commonly used. and the "township" is added if alot of people say it? I'll concede and leave them alone. TheDwellerCamp (talk) 04:17, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Yep, that's it exactly. Sometimes people include the word "township", usually to distinguish from similarly named nearby towns, as in the Chatham example mentioned above. If they say it, we include it. But we don't include it if they don't, which we used to be very bad about. oknazevad (talk) 04:57, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
So no action on names? TheDwellerCamp (talk) 17:28, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
I'd say no. The names of these articles have been stable for most of a decade. In the absence of strong consensus for changing names, we're probably good where we are. Alansohn (talk) 17:32, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Glimmer Guru

this guy is making random edits on fire departments throughout the state. Does this guy have any sources to this? TheDwellerCamp (talk) 15:12, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

No sources have ever been added and no response has ever been received on his talk page. The number of changes that are inconsistent with sourced and with his other edits leads me to question the validity of all of edits made by this user. Alansohn (talk) 16:52, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
69.125.36.151 Think i found his IP. TheDwellerCamp (talk) 16:41, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_New_Jersey/Archive_5&oldid=1087828878"