Talk:Watertown, Massachusetts

Notable people

Multiple times now I have put one line info for myself and a friend under the notable people section. We both grew up in Watertown from infancy through high school. Both of us are painters in the Boston area. Though not famous I thought it okay for us to put a little note and link to our personal arts websites. Multiple times they have been erased. Just because you don't know us, doens't mean we don't deserve at least a one sentence mention. I spent most of my life in Watertown, dammit. We grew up there. Get a life and stop just erasing things you personally don't deem "worthy" of mention. Maybe whoever felt the need to erase should try to create something notable within their own life that is worthy of mention. It's pathetic. -Rocco B. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.239.47.96 (talk • contribs) 13:42, 4 December 2007

I have added a segment on Watertown's role in labor and industrial history. I am a new Wikipedian and welcome help on tidying up my markup as I learn how to do it better. Lisa Williams 04:02, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks to whomever added the material from the 1911 Brittanica. I made a change to the item about a school being named after Theodore Parker. The building is still standing and has Parker's name engraved above the door, but is not currently in service as a public school; interestingly, it is now the New England School of Accupuncture. Most residents would probably not recognize the phrase "Parker School" because it has not been called that in so many years. Lisa Williams 09:45, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

I thought it was worthwhile to put the Armenian history museum in. It seemed to me to mesh nicely in the history section. Your mileage may vary, of course, so feel free to discuss, move, remove, whatever. I wonder if perhaps the History section ought to have a little more background from the 20th Century --Thatnewguy 11:25, 18 July 2006 (UTC).

Under people, should Tom Reilly be added? He's not Watertown-born, but he's been identified with the city because of his long (17 years? Something silly) residency here.--Thatnewguy 11:25, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Added per lack of opposition. He was born in Springfield, but his Wikipedia bio calls him a native. --Thatnewguy 22:49, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

The section on racial makeup of the town has been vandalized. JBH23 13:52, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I edited the History section to make it more readable, breaking up long sentences and making more paragraphs from sentences of similar topics. I added a References section as well as a new historical reference. More history (and references) would be good. MacPhilbin 19:18, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Map request

It would be helpful to have a map showing the original extent of the settlement's jurisdiction, and which neighboring municipalities have taken and given land to and from Watertown. -- Beland 01:11, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Notable businesses

This section seems like nothing more than a bit of advertising. As a Watertown resident, I haven't heard of any of them, and the Web site for one gives its address in Waltham. Is it normal to add such links to city articles?--JBH23 21:38, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

The current / immediately passed police incident

Wikipedia is not a news medium. Please wait until matters clarify themselves before adding, removing, editing, warring over this incident. There is no urgency to be first with the news here. When matters clarify themselves, please only add material fully cited in reliable sources Fiddle Faddle (talk) 08:08, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

If at all. We're writing a short account of almost 400 years of history. The fact that a few persons got shot and/or arrested doesn't necessarily qualify for mentioning, I'd say. But that's a discussion that's better to have when the smoke has cleared. /Julle (talk) 09:09, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

The answer depends on whether it is a genuinely notable incident, something that I feel to be unlikely. I was more interested in getting the rather silly nascent edit war stopped. If it is truly notable then it is truly notable. Time will tell. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 09:19, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Yeah. I just wanted to point out, for future reference, that everything that turns up in the news isn't necessarily encyclopedic, to remind people that we'll actually have to determine whether it should be included in the article or not. But, yes, time will tell. /Julle (talk) 09:41, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

The news coverage seems to point to it being likely to require its own article or be part of a different one, rather than be part of this one, that is if it is determined to be genuinely notable. I very much doubt an article about a town is a relevant place for such a news item anyway. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 09:49, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

You people are insane if you cannot see how this is going to be a historically significant incident for the town. 196.215.72.148 (talk) 16:15, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Your view would be better expressed with civility. It may hold sway, it may not, but wikipedia is not a medium for breaking news. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 18:21, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

It has nothing to do with the fact that it's breaking news, it has to do with the fact that it's a significant event. If something is a significant event, then of course it can be included even if it's a current event - there is no rule against significant events being included just because they're current, and that would fly starkly in the face with how most other articles on Wikipedia are handled. 196.209.243.217 (talk) 08:08, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

1628–1630

The history should link Massachusetts Bay Colony, at least, perhaps Winthrop Fleet. At least by rewrite, perhaps by expansion.

--P64 (talk) 18:46, 20 April 2013 (UTC)