Talk:Groton, Connecticut

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


You left out New Suffolk, NY birthplace of the "Silent Service" out on the north fork of Long Island. It is also where Albert Einstein (who may have had something to do with Italian torpedo development in the early 1930's) posted his letter to President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, warning him about "fission" experiments in Europe and said to have started the "Manhattan Project". There is currently a marker to attest to the "Silent Service" origin today, though the post office is gone. A large facility was there "Electric Boat" and "Holland Torpedo Boat Co. 100 Broadway, N.Y." See New_Suffolk_large.jpg.

This whole entry should be revised, perhaps to reflect more of the history of the submarine and New Jersey math teacher, Mr. Holland's development of it.

Wouldn't that go better at New Suffolk, New York, submarine, and/or John Philip Holland? --wwoods 17:27, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)


Why is Groton, Connecticut redirecting to Naval Submarine Base New London? Groton is the town. The base happens to be located in the town. Why do I have to view a page about the base in order to get to a page on the town, when the town is what I wanted to find information on when I searched "Groton, Connecticut"? Should New York City redirect to Metropolitan Museum of Art because it's located there? This is quite possibly the stupidest redirect I've seen on Wikipedia. It makes absolutely no sense. What's the reasoning behind it? Beginning 08:07, Aug 20, 2004 (UTC)

Better? When I found it, Groton, Connecticut was a stubby article about submarines, while the town info was at Groton (town), Connecticut. I expanded the former and eventually renamed it.
There's a lot of links to Groton, Connecticut that now need redirecting to NSB New London.
—wwoods 22:45, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I'll fix the links in return for your work. Thanks for resolving this. Sorry if I came off snappy before, but it just made no sense to me. Beginning 23:26, Aug 20, 2004 (UTC)

Added comment on BRAC closure list - KMC

Fair use rationale for Image:GrotonCTseal.jpg[edit]

Resolved: Fair use rationale provided. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 17:05, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:GrotonCTseal.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 07:43, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

merge from Groton (city), Connecticut[edit]

The City lies entirely within the town. The article to be merged has some stats, and not much more, with no reason to be expanded. All of that information would fit here quite nicely. This article would be stronger if it covered both the Town of Groton and the City within it. Jd2718 18:42, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Merge & redirect - The city is part of the town, even though independently chartered and the two articles are small enough that they would fit together nicely. When they are expanded sufficiently, they can be re-split in the future. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 18:49, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Do not merge - The city and the town are separate political entities. There are multiple communities contained inside towns in the New England and Middle Atlantic states and in general keeping the political entities separate is important to avoid confusion. Our focus should be on where we should place the bulk of the information contained in the articles. Which belongs with the town and which with the city. Whether the stats should be included in the city or town article depends on how the Census department has reported them. It appears that these stats are reported for both the town at large and many of the various sub-entities (such as Poquonock Bridge and the city article and others). This suggests that the city stats belong where they are, in the articles about the city, not the town. NoSeptember 19:09, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment - Connecticut's cities and towns are not arranged like those in the rest of the northeast. In the Middle Atlantic in particular NoSeptember's comments would be completely on target, but not in Connecticut. The entire state is completely divided into 169 discrete towns. The cities and boroughs reside within these towns. In most cases, eg New Haven, the city and town are identical. The only confusion we could cause would be by maintaining separate articles: someone searching for Groton, without both pieces in front of them, might pull up the wrong information. Jd2718 19:19, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment - The fact that the city and town are not coextensive is why the articles should not be merged. Just because the names and location are so close and overlapping as to be confusing to a reader is no reason to merge two non-equal political entities into one article. We can post prominent dab links to solve the issue of helping people find the right article they are looking for. NoSeptember 20:11, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
  • The New England town article explains this better than I can, but the fact is that the city is part of the town and that the town is the superior political entity. It might help you to think of the city as a special taxation district of the larger town with a political apparatus to support that infrastructure. Yes, welcome to Connecticut where we do things differently from everywhere else; our towns are just the beginning! —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 21:46, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
  • What makes you think I don't understand that the city is part of the town? Above I mentioned that other subdivisions (such as Poquonock Bridge) should also not be merged. It appears that the only real reason this merge is requested is because of the concern of name confusion, or else all the other subdivisions would be merged as well. Having stats for the city is good, but it shouldn't be in the town article any more than the stats of the other subdivisions should be in the town article. Just write a good explanation at the top of the city article, so that there is no confusion between the city and the town. NoSeptember 22:11, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Your reference to "Middle Atlantic" indicates some confusion. Further, the Poquonock Bridge article is an embarrassment - census info written in paragraph form (in clumsy English). The article does not even identify what town Poquonock Bridge is in. Jd2718 19:45, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
  • My apologies for misunderstanding you. Since you mention of CT's CDPs, I myself would support a merge of most of the members of Category:Census-designated places in Connecticut into their parent towns. A few, such as Rockville and Willimantic are substantial enough to be independent articles, but most are ignored stubs that would have more chance of development if merged into their parent towns. It may not be a bad idea to suspend this particular debate and bring up the broader one at WikiProject ConnecticutElipongo (Talk contribs) 02:10, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment Wikipedia does have neighborhood articles, e.g. Westville and Fair Haven in New Haven. The article on the City of Groton can be thought of in the same way. At present, though, there is not much information in both articles such that a split is needed. No opinion on whether to merge or not. --Polaron | Talk 23:25, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Do not merge Came across this discussion late. The situation is analogous to towns in New Hampshire and Maine which have separate articles for census-designated places within them. (See, for example, Bristol, New Hampshire and Bristol (CDP), New Hampshire.) This is a case where one entity (the city) is entirely within the other (the town), but it's useful for Census-reporting at a minimum to keep both articles. (By the way, I changed the opening to the article, because I don't think the bit about "not being conterminous" means what the author intended it to mean.) Ken Gallager 17:20, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Notable residents - require references[edit]

I removed the following items (all of the items) from article section on Notable residents, to here. IMO and in opinion of others, unreferenced items can/should be challenged and removed. I challenge all. Please don't re-add any without inline references supporting person's importance and person's significant association with Groton. Merely dying in the town is not enough. If there is evidence of town taking pride in the person, say by an official webpage of the town, that would probably suffice. --doncram 02:15, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Removed items:

  • Robert G. Albion (1896–1983), an influential maritime historian, died in Groton.
Wikipedia article on Albion perhaps supports his association with South Portland, Maine or elsewhere, but not Groton. --doncram 02:18, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
  • Brian Anderson (b. 1976), a professional skateboarder originally from Groton.
Wikipedia article on Anderson mentions stronger association with San Francisco, not enough to mention in San Francisco article, not at all enough to mention in Groton article, IMO. --doncram 02:18, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
  • George Mathanool (b.1963) a notable business advocate for Southeastern Connecticut, resident of Groton.
  • Captain James Avery (1620–1700), Captain of the New London Company.
  • Doctor James Cook Ayer (1818–1878), patent medicine businessman and industrialist.
Seems more strongly associated with Lowell, Massachusetts, accident of birth in Groton is non-remarkable. --doncram 14:05, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Probably appropriately mentioned in Fitch Senior High School article (although reference needed there); further mention in Groton article not supported. --doncram 14:05, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
  • Dave Campo, NFL coach, and a graduate of Fitch Senior High School.
  • Waightstill Avery (1741–1821), North Carolina politician, soldier in the American Revolutionary War, participant in a duel with Andrew Jackson.
  • Silas Deane (1737–1789), a delegate to the Continental Congress and the United States' first foreign diplomat, was born in Groton.
  • John J. Kelley (b. 1930) winner of the 1957 Boston Marathon, member of two U.S. Olympic Marathon teams.
  • Husband E. Kimmel (1882–1968) U.S. Navy rear admiral and commander of the Pacific Fleet, died in Groton.
  • William Ledyard (1738–1781), commander of Fort Griswold and killed in the attack on it, was born in Groton.
  • John Ledyard (1751–1789), an international explorer, was born in Groton.
  • Fran Mainella, National Park Service Director, 2001–2006, a graduate of Fitch Senior High School.
  • Paul Menhart, Former Toronto Blue Jays Pitcher, a graduate of Fitch Senior High School.
  • Lou Palazzi (1921–2007), an NFL player and umpire, was born in Groton.
"Born in Groton, Connecticut in 1921, son of the late Augusto and Rose Uguccioni Palazzi, he and his family immediately settled in Pennsylvania, where he was a resident for most of his life. A 1939 graduate of Dunmore High School [in Scranton]..." Seems not significantly related to Groton at all. --doncram 14:05, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Followup: An editor restored the notable residents section, with edit summary "there are at least several hundred place articles with this kind of section". I don't think that responds at all to the challenge that these specific items are not supported by references, and perhaps mostly or all not very highly associated with Groton, and that the section itself is non-encyclopedic. Again it is Wikipedia policy that unsupported assertions may be challenged and removed, and I do challenge all of these. I would be happy to see some actual documentation of significant association of some of these, but my presumption to start, based on checking a few of these and based on addressing other notable residents sections of other Connecticut articles, is that most/all of these are irrelevant mentions for the Groton article. "Other stuff exists" is not a valid argument in AFDs, and likewise here.

I think this kind of unreferenced, unexplained section, its current contents apparently defended by one or more editors based on some arbitrary, unexplained standard, provides entrapment of new editors who are attracted to adding other comparable items, only to encounter abrupt deletion of their work. I think that can provide a poor welcome to Wikipedia. I think we should avoid this entrapment by removing the unreferenced section entirely or limiting it to an observably relevant and supported shorter list. --doncram 13:59, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

History section is awful: unsourced, poorly written[edit]

The history section of this article is an embarrassment, both to the people and town of Groton and to the Wikipedia project. There are numerous grammatical errors, cliches, random bits of trivia, antiquated descriptions of the Pequots bordering on racism, and incompetent writing style generally. Here's an example: "The Pequots were a branch on the Mohawks of who were most feared. They were brave and heartless. They had little sympathy which allowed them to create horrifying types of torture for their enemies. They wrote their names in blood and fire all over but also in Groton, Connecticut." Furthermore, there are numerous factual errors, and no sources are cited whatsoever. There is a small clue that may explain what's going on. Towards the end of the history section, we find this: "Housing was beginning to run short so Groton Realty had to hurry to build hotels and cottages. The ships which brought the workers in turn also brought more business to the Realty." Groton Realty?? This suggests that the history section may have been borrowed from an old pamphlet or catalog for this local business, written perhaps around 1925. This entire section should be ditched and re-written from scratch. (talk) 01:28, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for volunteering! Best, Markvs88 (talk) 02:54, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Groton, Connecticut. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:02, 25 March 2017 (UTC)