Talk:Fairfield, Connecticut

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Cities (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Connecticut (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Connecticut, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Connecticut on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

No Incorporation/Charter/Organization Date[edit] (talk) 21:16, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Action Packers[edit]

Action Packers was removed as a movie filmed in Fairfield, but was readded. It is an official movie that was created by Evil Weasels Productions, a small time production studio based in Fairfield. It was also shown in the Community Theater of Fairfield. You can Google Evil Weasels, several of our films will show up, Action Packers was just a compilation of the smaller clips that show up.

Yes, but it's an amateur film, and therefore unimportant. You are just doing self-promotion, aren't you?-- 12:46, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Duh, but it doesn't say "Professional Movies", it just says movies.

It's also not notable. Also, sign your posts using four tildes. Legendotphoenix 20:00, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Actually, I just went ahead and took out that whole section. Two of these movies aren't notable, one was added by some kid who wants to promote his movie, and the other that's in pre-production has no proof that it's even being filmed in Fairfield. If you want to make a section in 'Connecticut' about movies filmed there, go right ahead. This article is kind of a mess as it is. Legendotphoenix 20:07, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Don't be a jerk, it looked fine, wikipedia is about people sharing information, not elitist snobs editing things out because they determine something is a mess. By the way, you may not be able to prove something is being filmed in Fairfield, but someone who lives there is well aware. So is the Connecticut Post. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:43, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Then why don't you throw some sources in there? Last time I checked, Wikipedia is not about advertising some guy's independent film, nor is it about original research. "Someone who lives there" is considered original research. Legendotphoenix 23:22, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Except that Wikipedia is not a legitimate source in the real world and never will be. UNder that basis original research should be used and people with further interest can get off their ass and look into it more because guess what, the movie Revolutionary Road is not only on wikipedia as being filmed in Fairfield, it's also on IMDB and a number of other sources, you elitist prick. I can honestly say you are ruining the entire purpose of Wikipedia, to share knowledge. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:11, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

It looks like your own personal view conflicts with WP policy, which is what I'm trying to use with this article - WP:NOR. If you have a strong view of what Wikipedia should be, then take it up with Wales himself. For the time being, I'm keeping the stuff off the page. Also, I would ask that you hold some respect for a fellow editor as I'm just trying to follow WP policy. Really, it's not hard to read the rules before you start editing every article that involes you promoting your movies and other stuff. Legendotphoenix 11:52, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

You deleted the section because the article was "a mess" so don't start playing the rules game. The fact is that you decided two movies were not notable, which honestly sounds very subjective, and that one has no proof of being filmed there. According to the rules however, wikipedia is entirely true, so the rules justify the movie being there, along with half a second of research on Google. Each of those movies were factually filmed in Fairfield, whether you think they're important is irrelevant. The RULES say they should stay. If you'd like to talk about principles then by all means you could justify getting rid of them, but the rules say they should be there regardless of if a person thinks they're important. I don't think the film "The Fat Spy" was important, but I'm not deleting the article. 02:29, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Look at my second post in this thread. When I started working on this article, it was a mess (grammatically), then I changed my intention to removing self-promoting movies from the article. Why don't we get back to the point at hand, shall we? Action Packers is a film that was uploaded to YouTube and Google Video. It is NOT notable. Show me anything other than the video itself. I'll lighten up about the entire movie section, but I don't feel Action Packers should be on there. This was my original point in bringing up WP:NOR. I would like to mention that I am not deleting portions that I do not think is important, I'm deleting portions that Wikipedia thinks is unimportant. Once again, if you feel so desperate in promoting Action Packers, take it up with Wales himself. Until then, let's keep it off the article. "Agree to Disagree" is resulting in an edit war. Find me a decent source for Action Packers, and I'll leave the section alone. Dandy? Legendotphoenix 21:05, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Also, I moved the IMDB source from the movie section to the external links section. Legendotphoenix 21:08, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't know anything about Action Packers, I was merely preserving the movies section from being erased since there was nothing wrong with it. 17:20, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Who is Stewart Smith?[edit]

Stewart Smith has been added to the "famous people" section, but I did a quick Google search and found no well-known artist or designer (as he's described) with that name. couldn't find anyone with the name "Stuart Smith" who's a famous artist or designer either.

So why shouldn't I remove that from the page? Was it a joke to put him there? Can anyone cite anything anywhere showing why he should be on that list? Anyone have any information? If I hear nothing, I'll remove it eventually.Noroton 16:00, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

I think they should be removed. They were probably added as jokes, and if we can't find any references to them online, they probably aren't famous enough to warrant inclusion on the list, even if they are real. I just removed Zach Olson, whom I found to be a junior at Fairfield Prep. I couldn't find any references to him being an techno DJ. PatrickLien 14:31, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Famous People[edit]

Added Richard Rogers and Robert Penn Warren. I grew up in Fairfield and went to school with Robert Penn Warren's son and Richard Rogers house was a few miles down the road from where I lived.

Just Some Very Minor Edits[edit]

I just cleaned up the article a little bit, nothing major (grammar edits and such). The most major edit I made was with the list in which the "Movies Filmed in Fairfield" was listed. It was listed

  • 2002
  • 1998
  • 1975
  • 2006

I moved the bottom movie to the top. Legendotphoenix 23:29, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Ralph Bowley - Selectman[edit]

Bowley, a former selectman died recently. He should be removed as a selectman and replaced with Jim Walsh, the new selectman. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:05, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Fairfield, Connecticut. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Question? Archived sources still need to be checked

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:11, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Anglican reforms[edit]

>"In 1635, Puritans and Congregationalists in the Massachusetts Bay Colony, dissatisfied with the rate of Anglican reforms...."

Was this because the reforms were being adopted too fast or too slowly? Rissa, Guild of Copy Editors (talk) 06:09, 26 December 2015 (UTC)