Talk:Darien, Connecticut

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Notable retail businesses 2 McDonalds 3 Cleanup 4 Anti-semitism? 5 From Education Page-talk 6 Gentleman's Agreement

[edit] Notable retail businesses

I've removed this addition to the section:

• Baubles Jewelry Store, Sterling Silver 1070 Post Road, Darien

I removed it because when I started that section, I realized that it was open to abuse -- any business in town might be listed unless we have some standards for it. This is my proposed standard: A business that is well known throughout the town either because it is very old (not sure how old should be the cutoff) or because it is well known for doing something important or doing it extremely well, or does something innovative that no other business does. That standard could probably be refined more, but I think it's a good start.

Does "Baubles" fit the standard? If not, I'd oppose putting it back in. Anyone have any thoughts?Noroton 20:38, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] McDonalds

I added a "citation needed" mark next to the mention that the McDonald's off the highway in Darien is the busiest McDonald's in the country. Having lived in Darien for 10 years, I seriously doubt that statement. Chris Berry 18:36, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Some google searches confirmed it. [1] I added a citation. I'm a bit suprised but I guess it makes sense. A lot of comuters probably go there on their way to NYC Lyo 02:46, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

The Stamford Advocate actually mentioned the same thing in an article a few years ago (it surprised me at the time, so I distinctly remember it). What I'm curious about is whether it's the southbound McDonalds (closer to Stamford) or the northbound McDonalds (closer to Norwalk). I'm going to try to check it out in the future.

The volume of the eastbound McDonalds would probably be related to the fact that it's the first rest stop on Interstate 95 once traveler's go over the George Washington Bridge. If New York state ever wanted to go through the trouble of putting a rest stop on the highway in that state, it would rake in a lot of money. Noroton June 27, 2006

I think this statement needs to be reworded, and confirmed for the present...the citation refers to it being the busiest *before* the air and space musuem venue was opening, so Darien's stop being the busiest location five years later may no longer be valid...there are a couple options: delete the statement outright, or find an updated citation (if the statement is still true)....if it's no longer true, either delete the statement or reword it (at least "is" to "was", if being the former busiest site is still noteable). Given the circumstances the statement cannot stay as is.TJ0513 13:50, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup

The templates and images near the top are in severe need of cleaning; they leave a lot of open space, and overlap. I'd clean it myself but I don't have the proper knowledge to fix the templates readily at hand. So please, Noroton, don't make snide comments about how if an article needs cleaning, I should 'lift a finger' and do it myself. It isn't very polite.--Vercalos 22:44, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

And this is polite? "Article is very sloppy. No offense to the contributors." You sound very much like someone else I've seen around here. Same lack of courtesy, same phony shock at being called on it. Same concentration on criticizing and lack (at least initially) of constructive help. If you're not "TJ" you two sure have a lot in common. Thanks so much for the changes you've made so far, it really helps to have the contents box crowd the top of the page.Noroton 00:20, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

As opposed to having them crowded in the middle, just below the introduction?--Vercalos 00:38, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure there's an ideal solution. The top section is only so long. When the town-information box was introduced it was, overall, an improvement I think, but it caused a large blank space on the left. To try to fix that, I moved up the Twilight on the Sound picture, which still seems to help somewhat, but white space remains. I've fiddled with it some more, incorporating most of your changes, which have made improvements, but moving back down the table of contents box.

I've noticed that there are big differences in the layout depending on how big you make the screen. I usually view it as a window smaller than my entire computer screen, but when I make the viewing window as big as my computer screen, different kinds of white space develop or the table-of-contents box moves either to the midde or creates a larger white space. It might be better to move "Twilight on the Sound" back down into the page and just accept that a large white space is inevitable unless more text (eventually) goes into the top section. With the changes I've made, how do you think the page looks now? I wouldn't want to do any other layout work other than moving that "Twilight" picture down. I'd be interested in hearing what you think.Noroton 01:00, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm taking a look at the articles for other cities, and thinking it might be a good idea to flesh out the infobox and get rid of the images(at least in the introduction. Check out Los Angeles, California and Detroit, Michigan to see examples of what I mean..--Vercalos 01:27, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and as for getting rid of the white space, short of floating the Table of Contents(which seems to mess up the formatting even more if you try floating it anywere other than the top), it seems more or less impossible.--Vercalos 01:28, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I made an example in my sandbox if you want to see.--Vercalos 01:30, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I made a slew of changes which basically follow the Los Angeles and Detroit pages: I put a picture into the municipality box, removed the other pictures (I think having a picture up top is important, ideally a "skyline" type of picture showing some typical scene that everybody in town sees, but I think the picture in the box will do). I relengthened the table-of-contents box by returning subheadings to recreation and education. Now, as with LA and Detroit, the layout works either with full-screen or smaller window versions. Your help was useful.Noroton 02:57, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about blowing up like that.--Vercalos 04:38, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Anti-semitism?

Where did you get the information that "In 1948 a billboard reading "Gentiles Only" greeted visitors on Hollow Tree Road."? I have not found or heard that info anywhere other than Wikipedia, despite having lived in Darien for several years. I realize that this quote, along with the information about Darien being a sundown town, has been removed but that merely makes the section about anti-semitism seem even more out-of-place and wrong. Please provide a source citation(s) to prove that Darien has an anti-semitic past and was not just used as a fictional example in Gentleman's Agreement. I am not saying it is not truth - it may very well be. I simply want proof. Without proof it's just really nasty mud-slinging. Thank you in advance! —Lilly Williams (talk) 15:27, 16 November 2006

I was about to post that nobody from Darien must read Wikipedia but you proved me wrong, thanks. I changed the section title since the movie was fictional and references are required for such material. I remembering seeing this when I first joined Wikipedia and had the same concerns as you but didn't edit it. Anyways, if anybody else wants to chime in or provide sources, that would be fine. Thanks --Tom 18:29, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Ditto with Tom. I added a "citation needed" a night or two ago. Like Lilly Williams, I'm not saying it's not true, but I'm saying for something like that a citation is in order. I did a google search and couldn't find anything that wasn't wikipedia itself or an extraction. I would give it a little more time, then if nothing is added, delete per WP:Verify. Jakerforever 14:02, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] From Education Page-talk

Please see my arguement, asking for whether the cancellation listings are neccesary, which I claim, are not. Jakerforever 18:37, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gentleman's Agreement

I think this paragraph needs to stay in the main article simply because it's been a very notable fact about Darien for decades. Jakerforever deleted it, but I'm restoring it pending some kind of consensus that it should go. It would be in the History of Darien, Connecticut article in any event, but we try to keep a good summary of the history in a section in any town article, and the summary should hit the highlights. Noroton 04:28, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Apologies, I perhaps should have explained myself better. Last night, I was wikifying some words in the article and got the strongest sense of déjà vu. Switching to the main article, I saw I had already read and edited what was essentially exactly the same thing. I didn't think I was cutting it so much as reducing duplicate material; what I removed is almost a cut-and-paste from the section in the history portion of the History of Darien article. I don't think it should be in both places and for this reason I'd vote to delete it from the main article (but by all means, expand the section in the history article, even).

Noroton, what I'm hearing from you is that you think the main page preface to the seperate history article should highlight the history article itself. I agree that this would be a good thing to do. However, I would argue that including information on the Gentleman's Agreement connection is not important; it isn't "essential" enough to Darien such that it would merrit a bullet-point in the town's centuries-old history. I think it's important, just not THAT important. Best, Jakerforever 13:58, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I think it's just a judgment call on what's significant and what isn't. I'm absolutely positive that if we'd been having this dialogue 20 years ago, which was a quarter century after the movie, that Gentleman's Agreement would have been hands-down, no-doubt one of the significant things about Darien that people knew about well beyond the town's borders (which I think counts for a lot in an encyclopedia with a globe in its logo). But at some point, over time, the importance recedes. I don't think it's receded so much that we shouldn't have any mention of it at all on the main page, and I think we need enough explanation of it so that people know what it's about. I created the history article from material originally in the history section of the Darien article and rather than rewrite, I just deleted whatever I thought wasn't essential.

Another thing that concerns me -- that apalls me -- is how information that is embarassing to communities keeps on getting deleted on Wikipedia and ignored outside Wikipedia. I was amazed to read in a respectable source (a book about the history of the Roman Catholic Bridgeport Diocese by the monsignior who runs the Catholic church in downtown Stamford) that there was a history of Klan activity in Fairfield County. Information about that has been deleted numerous times from the places where I've added it in Wikipedia articles. Almost always entirely deleted, almost always by anonymous accounts, and almost always with "edit summary" statements saying something to the effect of "it's bad for the community to have this blot on its past kept in the public eye". So maybe I'm a bit too sensitive to the removal of something like "Gentleman's Agreement". I think it's important to avoid whitewashing the past the way the Japanese do about World War II. And while I've only encountered blatant, explicit anti-Semitism in Fairfield County (including in Darien) a handful of times (in conversations, and not in jokes -- and I'm not Jewish), it's enough so that I know it's definitely around. When there's a solid source for mentioning an important topic, we should at least mention it. I'm not saying this is a solid reason for keeping it, it's just something to keep in mind.

I don't think we should take out Gentleman's Agreement without more input from other editors. I'm not absolutely certain it should stay, but I think wider agreement is needed. I think it's entirely possible that other editors, later, will simply add it back in, not even knowing it was deleted. Most important, I think it's useful to readers who may be wondering what the name of that movie was that had Gregory Peck in it and took place in Darien. Noroton 16:10, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

My main problem with the mention of A Gentleman's Agreement was that it was almost a cut-and-paste job...I was serious when I said I had a feeling of deja vu when I read it again. =) It's like how many find it to be annoying when words are annoyingly used repeatedly in the same sentence - it's annoying. How about this for a compromise: by all means keep the mention of the film, but we should re-write it so it's not so "cut and paste"...I'd be happy with that. It was the material I had a problem with so much as the redundancy.

By the way, a few other things: (1) I'm not sure what the story is with you and other editors over the KKK, but it's not fair to take that with you into another discussion. Actually, on the subject, I'd prefer the KKK mention over the Gentleman's Agreement mention, because the KKK is a little more (in)famous; would that mean more note-worthy? (2) Japan's government is not the only the only government that whitewashes. (3) I'm not convinced that Darien today is not in anyway characterized by anti-semitism (it's ok for a historical context...I wonder if a citation if available for the "Gentile's Only" sign suggested...see above) or racism or any other "ism", except maybe a geographical "ism", against the residents of Bridgeport, Norwalk, and to some extent Stamford - a "looking down the nose" if you will. I used to work in Norwalk and always got a funny look when I mentioned it - now I work in New York and and to think of the naivity of those other people I look back and laugh.

OK, here's an even better compromise - The gentleman's agreement mention seems to be part of the exclusivity section of the history...maybe make a brief summary, including the gentleman's agreement and the KKK stuff you like, and maybe something...else? Jakerforever 19:38, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

As long as the most basic information is there for the movie, I'm flexible as to the language. (1) I'm not sure I understand your double negative; I don't know entirely what the story is either, because they're anonymous when they delete and they seldom say much; (2) irrelevant, I just mentioned it as an example (3) all I know is that it exists here; I doubt it's widespread; I once did a Google search and found the citation about the "Gentile's only" business, I think on some site about "sundown towns", but I forgot to bookmark it. I wasn't too impressed with the single site that had this information, although it did seem to come from an academic. I've always hoped somebody would come by with a good citation. I don't object to it being deleted from the article, but perhaps it should be cut and pasted on the talk page. Why don't you rewrite the history section? I doubt I'll have any objections to it as long as the movie is mentioned and reader's know essentially what it was. And there's no need to be so prickly. There are many more interesting things to argue about. ;)Noroton 21:15, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Prickly? Are you joking?!? Jakerforever 01:32, 28 March 2007 (UTC)