Tennessee Project‑class

Wikipedia:WikiProject Tennessee is within the scope of WikiProject Tennessee, an open collaborative effort to coordinate work for and sustain comprehensive coverage of Tennessee and related subjects in the Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, and even become a member. [Project Articles] • [Project Page] • [Project Talk] • [Assessment] • [Template Usage]TennesseeWikipedia:WikiProject TennesseeTemplate:WikiProject TennesseeTennessee Project This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5

I brought this up a year or two ago...and decided today I'd get around to doing it. I know that we've been removing the notable residents sections from a few articles...I'm going to try to do them all. They are all trivia, there is no criteria as to what constitutes a "resident" (the White House, Tennessee article included Andrew Jackson because he was rumored to have maybe spent the night there once) and they are mostly unreferenced. --Smashville^talk 21:13, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, good changes. I would say that if there are verifiable residents who have had a measurable impact on the community, an argument could be made to keep those, but yeah, for the most part, it is all trivia. — Huntster (t @ c) 03:50, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

While I have no love lost for Notable Resident lists (apparently everyone from Cleveland, Tennessee thinks themselves notable), when this issue came up two years ago, User:Orlady presented an argument for keeping the lists (Archive 3), to which no one really responded. I agree the lists are abused, though. Bms4880 (talk) 10:52, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I've been busy restoring some of the notable residents sections that Smashville has been busy deleting (before having seen this conversation, which Bms4880 pointed me to).

I see these wholesale removals as a case of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I'm all-too-aware of a propensity to add the names of all manner of show biz stars to articles about Nashville suburban communities where they may or may not live (these are generally unverifiable because these people generally don't advertise their places of residence, so the entries ought to be deleted) and Andrew Jackson should not be identified as a resident of White House, Tennessee. Also, I'm chronically annoyed by the inclusion of names of people who merely attended college in a town (this is a particularly chronic issue in the Clarksville, Tennessee article). Those types of entries are "bathwater" that deserves to be dumped.

However, the names of prominent local residents are an important part of the "story" of many cities and towns -- particularly the smaller communities -- so this information is not inherently nonencyclopedic trivia (as the edit summaries have implied). Furthermore, these people's residency is often well-documented even if the place-name article doesn't cite sources.

Accordingly:

• I restored the mention of Grace Moore to the Jellico article because I have the general impression that she's the single most important positive thing that ever happened to Jellico. I researched her article a few years ago because I was puzzled to find that Chattanooga was claiming her (it turns out that she's buried there), and I'm quite sure that the Jellico connection is sourced (although not cited in the Jellico article).
• I restored the Roan Mountain Hilltoppers to the Roan Mountain town article with an expanded discussion of who they are (since they don't have their own article, but I think they probably are wiki-notable). There's some ambiguity in references to "Roan Mountain, Tennessee", so I'm not 100% sure they truly are from the town rather than from somewhere near Roan Mountain, but the association seems to be significant for the town. Maybe they can be spun off into a separate article that could be listed as a "See also."
• I restored the mention of Dean Dillon to the Lake City article, but with less fluff. It was clear from his article that he's from Lake City (I've now added a source ref to the Lake City article) and that he started his career in the local area; I think Lake City deserves to "take credit" for him. (I also restored the mention of the Fraterville mining disaster, since it's often described as having occurred in "Coal Creek, Tennessee", the former name of Lake City -- and Fraterville isn't exactly an identifiable town.)
• I restored most or all of the list to Oak Ridge, Tennessee (where I live). The large number of notable people associated with this small city (which has existed for less than 70 years) is a source of significant local interest and pride (and anons keep adding Megan Fox's name to the article, even though it's already there -- if it were removed, that activity probably would increase).
• I restored most or all of the list in the Maryville article, as I believe that most (if not all) of these people are strongly connected with Maryville's present or past. However, I flagged the list as needing references.
• I reserve the right to restore additional lists in similar fashion.

Let's not assume that notable people are inherently trivial (particularly when we are looking at articles that document the existence of a Dollar General store or the types of bands featured at the city's annual festival). Instead, I submit that our focus should be on evaluating verifiability and relevance (including WP:N), and deleting stuff that doesn't belong on the basis of those considerations. --Orlady (talk) 14:08, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wish to second everything Orlady has said here. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:38, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could a member of this project living in the Memphis area possibly take some photographs of Temple Israel (Memphis, Tennessee)? It's currently over 54kb (and over 5200 words), and a WP:GA candidate, but has not one picture! Jayjg ^(talk) 02:58, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This page has been initiated - any help in filling in missing federal courthouses, or providing missing information on listed courthouses (especially pictures) would be appreciated. Cheers! bd2412 T 00:38, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Tennessee articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 23:42, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• The Bridge (2006 drama)

Relevant AFD, please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Bridge (2006 drama). -- Cirt (talk) 06:14, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An anon is determined to add some unsourced data to the demographics section of the Tennessee article, so someone may want to lock it. Bms4880 (talk) 21:47, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I semi-protected the article again. --Orlady (talk) 00:11, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have created together with Smallman12q a toolserver tool that shows a weekly-updated list of cleanup categories for WikiProjects, that can be used as a replacement for WolterBot and this WikiProject is among those that are already included (because it is a member of Category:WolterBot cleanup listing subscriptions). See the tool's wiki page, this project's listing in one big table or by categories and the index of WikiProjects. Svick (talk) 20:24, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Cleanup listing subpage Wikipedia:WikiProject Tennessee/Cleanup listing referenced by the WolterBot box at Wikipedia:WikiProject Tennessee#Article status is seriously out of date — March 2010. I suggest the WolterBot box be removed and the subpage labeled as 'Reference Only' SBaker43 (talk) 05:47, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, WikiProject Tennessee! We are looking for editors to join WikiProject United States, an outreach effort which aims to support development of United States related articles in Wikipedia. We thought you might be interested, and hope that you will join us. Thanks!!!

--Kumioko (talk) 02:57, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Temple Israel (Memphis, Tennessee) has been nominated for Featured Article status; the discussion is here. Any comments, advice or other input would be appreciated. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:49, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have started a conversation here about the possibility of combining some of the United States related WikiProject Banners into {{WikiProject United States}}. If you have any comments, questions or suggestions please take a moment and let me know. --Kumioko (talk) 20:25, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see no need for this. The Tennessee template is already using WPBannerMeta, which is bad enough (in my opinion, of course). — Huntster (t @ c) 05:07, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps someone from the western end of the state can address the request below, which was posted on my talk page. (I edited it to fit into this context better.) --Orlady (talk) 14:39, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Southern College of Optometry

Good Morning-How are you doing? If you have the time would you please look at the Southern College of Optometry, in Memphis, Tennessee. I was working on an article about a Kansas legislator James Morrison (Kansas politician) who just died and Morrison graduated from the school. The article about the school may need to be edited. Thank you as always-RFD (talk) 14:21, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FedEx Express Flight 647 has been nominated for deletion Mjroots (talk) 09:00, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is that a term? Hmm, there is Century Farm article, so i gather a Tennessee Century Farm is a continuing farm >100 years in operation. I wonder is there a list of these, are these especially notable in Tennessee, because i notice Smithson-McCall Farm is described as being one. Any help categorizing, developing this new article appreciated. I'm working on some other NRHP-listed places in Williamson County, too. --Doncram (talk) 05:04, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is not unique to Tennessee. There are "century farm" programs in almost every state of the United States (not just the states listed in Century Farm). As you inferred/discovered, these are farms that have been in operation for more than a century -- generally as family farms that have remained in the hands of the same family. I've used "century farm" information in other articles, so it should be possible to find resources by searching wikipedia for that term. I am not aware of any master list, but one of the state universities maintains a website about these farms. --Orlady (talk) 05:27, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, i now see this page on What is the Tennessee Century Farms program. They claim a lot for the Tennessee Century Farms program, including credit for a MPS study, which "Considered a model for rural preservation, this was the first thematic nomination in the country to deal with historic farmsteads" (which i think cannot be true, or can be true only in a narrow way). They also note "Many Century Farm families choose to have their farms nominated to the National Register as a protective measure from future federally-funded projects that may impact their farm." which seems to indicate not much benefit from NRHP listing (like no tax credits, and like no eligibility for some well-funded state grant program). But then i did see Smithson-Carlson Farm being mentioned in comments to the effect that a transmission lines impacts on it would be "completely unacceptable", within an Enviromental Impact statement, in this TVA report. NRHP listing does raise a hurdle for other Federal agencies, that they must consider and perhaps mitigate or avoid impacts.

There is likely enough material for an article about the Tennessee Century Farms program. "After 30 years, the statewide and ongoing program has 1,357 certified farms. Of that number 136 are 200 years old, 603 are 150 years old, and 618 are over 100 years old." Etc. And they all are listed; you can get to information and pics about each one. A list of them all could be included in Wikipedia.

Or, this all could be material for an article Historic preservation in Tennessee, which could have a section on the Tennessee Century Farms program to which Tennessee Century Farms could redirect, and which could serve other purposes, such as characterizing advantages and disadvantages of NRHP listing, and of other programs, in this state. There's a fledgling article at Historic preservation in New York which could give some ideas; i don't think there are any other state-specific articles this way (see also this (now-archived) discussion at wt:NRHP). --Doncram (talk) 13:02, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Boyd-Wilson Farm is another NRHP-listed century farm in TN; there is now a Category:Century farms to which others can be added. --doncram 18:21, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you are interested in century farms, you should be aware that century farm programs are not unique to Tennessee. They exist in most or all U.S. states and in at least one Canadian province. New York's century farm program began in 1937.[1] Iowa and Minnesota have designated thousands of century farms since starting the program in 1976.[2][3] New Jersey hasn't designated nearly as many, but its program apparently started in 1976 or 1977.[4] Kansas has had a program since at least 2000.[5] Oregon has added a "sesquicentennial award" for farms or ranches in the same family for over 150 years.[6] --Orlady (talk) 17:32, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, i am aware (see above). Some but not all of those new mentions are within the current Century Farms article, an article which has links to many state programs and which could use further development. That article and a couple Tennessee century farm articles were tagged by me to be in a category, mentioned above. Interesting that some states' programs are relatively new. It seems that the Tennessee program claims a lot about itself and/or the relatively greater importance of century farms for Tennessee. Thanks. --doncram 20:00, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject NRHP has just recently started doing importance ratings and has put all National Historic Landmark properties of Tennessee in at High importance. The National Historic Landmarks are quite a high honor roll of historic sites, all having national impdortance and higher site integrity and other requirements than for regular NRHP listings, and can be quite outstanding. These are indexed at List of NHLs in TN. I notice that many of these are rated as "Mid" importance by Wikiproject Tennesseee, but some, including Talk:Downtown Presbyterian Church, Nashville show "Low" importance. Could these be revisited and all be given Mid, or perhaps higher rating, supporting further development?

Also, going the other way, is there some subset of NRHP-listed places in Tennessee, say those in some state program, which WikiProject NRHP should rate higher than it does? Wikiproject NRHP is applying "Low" importance ratings as the default for NRHP-listed places, but "Mid" rating is available to be used in any way that makes sense here. --Doncram (talk) 13:24, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Tennessee WikiProject's importance scale at Wikipedia:WikiProject Tennessee/Assessment#Importance scale focuses on importance within the state context. An article that is very important for some other WikiProject could be of relatively low interest for Tennessee. I believe the contributors who rated most of these articles do not consider very many individual buildings to be of greater than "low" interest for this WikiProject, regardless of what the NRHP WikiProject might think. --Orlady (talk) 21:15, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think National Historic Landmark sites usually do have state and/or local importance; it's hard for a building to have importance at only national level and not any importance locally. Is the Downtown Presbyterian Church, Nashville one not important for Tennessee? Looking at its article, it was designed by William Strickland, a Nashville architect who also designed the Tennessee state capital. It's asserted to be one of few church examples of Egyptian Revival architecture nationally, so it must be one of even fewer in Tennessee. I was just wondering if WikiProject TN regulars would like to revisit this and other TN NHLs.

Going the other way, i wonder if the 14 Tennessee state-owned historic sites here, many/most of which are probably NRHP-listed are more important to TN than other NRHP-listed places? If so then WikiProject NHRP would want to rate them higher than Low, too. Looking, i see now that there is Category:Tennessee State Historic Sites and that at least a couple of those have "Mid" ratings given by TN, while being Low rated by wp:NRHP so far. In another state i know about, I would say the state-owned historic sites are very important, that the state ownership really is a significant indicator of importance which i would carry back to a Mid rating for wp:NRHP rating, too. State ownership and operation as a historic site requires continued budgetary support, which suggests state importance. But i don't know if state ownership is significant, if these are regarded as important, here in TN.

Hey, i further notice now the James K. Polk Ancestral Home is both an NHL and a Tennessee-owned historic site, currently rated Low by TN while High by wp:NRHP. I would hope it deserves a higher TN rating, despite President Polk being a figure of national stature. :)

As a shortcut, I suggest that the Category:National Historic Landmarks in Tennessee ones be given Mid rating for TN, unless TN really wants to assert disfavor with something or someone too Yankee-oriented or otherwise distasteful, and that each one individually be considered for High rating.

Thanks for commenting, anyhow. --doncram 22:35, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Orlady's post. I see no problem with having vastly different ratings between projects. The NRHP project should rate articles according to how important they are to the project or to a national audience. Tennessee will rate articles according to how important the article is to this project or the state in general. Personally, while I love architecture, I would not rate most buildings in Tennessee as having beyond low importance, save for those that are highly iconic or historic in nature. — Huntster (t @ c) 23:57, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, one part of it was that i was asking you, does any editor here know about any Tennessee places that are more historically important than is recognized simply in NRHP listing. I take it the answer is No so far, which is okay; there's no reason that editors here have to know about historic preservation stuff in the state. I was just asking.

But about any suggestion the TN rating of importance might be changed, I am sensing some resistance here. Orlady's comment came across as negative although i fully agree that for the most part, NRHP-listed places should be rated no greater than "low" interest for wp:TN. There are in fact 1,975 NRHP places in Tennessee according to National Register of Historic Places listings in Tennessee right now, almost all rated Low by wp:TN and to be rated Low by wp:NRHP as well. They are almost all listed because of Tennessee state staff working on their being nominated and promoted as being of local or state importance, by the way.

What i am asking about, is whether Wp:TN editors would consider the perhaps-new/perhaps-not-yet-considered information that some few of these, 33 i think, are actually a lot more important than the others, including for wp:TN, according to wp:TN's own rating system. The articles might not yet reflect the importance, but a partly-Tennessee-state-run process has led to a select few of the NRHPs to be recognized as U.S. National Historic Landmarks. I think that you might consider there could be importance for Tennessee reflected in the NHL designations. I don't myself know details about very many of these, and i doubt whether Orlady or many wp:TN editors have really considered them either. I do know from other states, and from some consideration of some of the TN ones, that the NHLs are more important than regular NRHP-listed places. Are you simply dismissing that? Why dismiss that?

In particular, i suggested looking at two where TN's rating is currently Low. Why not revisit those two (and look to see whether others of the 33 are rated Low and should be upgraded, too)? In fact by this CatScan search, i see a total of 13 worth revisiting:

1. Talk:Battle of Franklin (1864)
2. Talk:Chucalissa Indian Village
3. Talk:Downtown Presbyterian Church, Nashville
4. Talk:Fort Loudoun (Tennessee)
5. Talk:James K. Polk Ancestral Home
6. Talk:Long Island (Tennessee)
7. Talk:Rhea County Courthouse
8. Talk:Sun Studio
9. Talk:Sycamore Shoals
10. Talk:The Hermitage (Nashville, Tennessee)
11. Talk:William Blount Mansion
12. Talk:Wynnewood (Tennessee)
13. Talk:X-10 Graphite Reactor

I don't want to claim it is a really huge favor to you, but i did come with some perspective, some knowledge, to offer up for you. :) --doncram 02:53, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also the following are rated High by NRHP and are probably all NHLs, while being rated only Mid by TN.

1. Talk:Delta Queen
2. Talk:Fort Pillow State Park
3. Talk:Franklin Battlefield
4. Talk:Hiram Masonic Lodge No. 7
5. Talk:Jubilee Hall
6. Talk:Moccasin Bend
7. Talk:Montgomery Bell Tunnel
8. Talk:Peabody College
9. Talk:Pinson Mounds
10. Talk:Rattle and Snap
11. Talk:Sgt. Alvin C. York State Historic Park
12. Talk:T. O. Fuller State Park

--doncram 14:46, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm upgrading the NHL ones above that are rated Low by TN to Mid for TN. That's a compromise; i think they should be ranked high and there are no good reasons stated for any of these ones for them not to be ranked high. This discussion thread was another kinda unpleasant one. I guess i'm already a member here, having signed up at some foolish moment, so you can't object that i am not formally a member of WikiProject TN.

It is pretty obvious these select historic sites are more important than other ones, and should have higher rating for importance for Wikipedia Tennessee editors in general, or at least for editors not just wanting to be rude for sake of being unpleasant. If you look at them and the rankings system here, you'd see that they should probably be ranked High.

I'm not saying importance ratings are all that important, but it seems kinda silly to have them and then to be unpleasant to someone who points out where the importance ratings should be improved. --doncram 00:42, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Casliber recently posted a suggestion on the talk page for WikiProject United States about getting the US Wikipedians Collaboration page going again in an effort to build up articles for GA through FA class. See Wikipedia:U.S. Wikipedians' notice board/USCOTM. After several days of work from him the page is up and ready for action. A few candidates have already been added for you to vote on or you can submit one using the directions provided. If you are looking for inspiration here is a link to the most commonly viewed articles currently under the scope of Wikiproject United States. There are tons of good articles in the various US related projects as well so feel free to submit any article relating to US topics (not just those under the scope of WPUS). This noticeboard is intended for ‘’’All’’’ editors working on US subjects, not just those under WPUS.

The next item I intend to start updating is Portal:United States if anyone is interested in helping. Again this is not specific to WPUS and any help would be greatly appreciated to maximize visibility of US topics. The foundation has already been established its just a matter of updating the content with some new images, biographies and articles. Please let leave a comment on the Portals talk page or let me know if you have any questions or ideas. --Kumioko (talk) 19:30, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If anyone is in Nashville, would anyone mind fulfilling this photo request?

• headquarters of the Corrections Corporation of America at 10 Burton Hills Boulevard Nashville, Tennessee 37215

Thanks, WhisperToMe (talk) 03:38, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have proposed establishing a WikiProject for Greater Memphis - please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Memphis WhisperToMe (talk) 15:20, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There's a town named Jonesborough, Tennessee which has been also referred to as Jonesboro, erroneously or as a proper alternative name. I just created Jonesboro Historic District (Jonesboro, Tennessee) as an NRHP article to address the naming issue for that district. The NRHP name could possibly be a typo, in which case it should be moved to "Jonesborough Historic District" leaving a redirect behind, but I am guessing that "Jonesboro" is an acceptable alternate name (or that it historically was). My best info is that the NRHP name is in fact "Jonesboro Historic District", although I have not obtained or requested the official NRHP nomination document which would provide more clear evidence. Does anyone here know? --doncram 20:32, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The town was founded in 1779 as "Jonesborough." The spelling "Jonesboro" was adopted around 1880. The town voted to return to the original "Jonesborough" in 1983. The historic district was listed (1969) when the spelling was still "Jonesboro," hence the spelling. I suggest moving the article to "Jonesborough Historic District," with a redirect, and mention on the Jonesboro Historic District disambiguation page. Bms4880 (talk) 21:44, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bms4880 is right. The name of the town is "Jonesborough," and the historic district is a tourist attraction that is widely known by the "Jonesborough" spelling. I moved the article. For what it's worth, I believe that the "boro" spelling resulted from a standardized-spelling initiative of the U.S. federal government (the same one that is discussed in Etymology of Pittsburgh#Official elimination and restoration of the 'h'). --Orlady (talk) 05:54, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. I didn't see that info about name changing in the Jonesborough, Tennessee article; hopefully it can be added if it's not there already. But then the NRHP listing name, from 1969, was in fact accurately using name Jonesboro Historic District. This apparently is not, was not, listed on the National Register as "Jonesborough Historic District". I don't see any evidence that there is a historic district of the Jonesborough name, i.e. i don't think there was a name change put through in the National Register system or that the district is officially or unofficially known as "Jonesborough Historic District". However there is documentation of it being named as "Jonesboro Historic District" in the NRHP listing and in the multiple copies of info at private sites like www.nationalregisterofhistoricplaces.com. So, I think it should now be moved to Jonesboro Historic District (Jonesborough, Tennessee) reflecting accurately the NRHP listing name and the location of the place in what is now known as Jonesborough, and leaving redirects from the other names. I'll browse a bit more now before implementing that. --doncram 19:51, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bms, what is your source for that useful info about the town's 2 renamings? And/or could you add that to the Jonesborough, Tennessee article. In some more browsing, I find this brochure about historic Jonesborough which carefully avoids giving a name to the historic district, referring to it as "Jonesborough's historic district" instead. And i find no reliable source giving "Jonesborough Historic District" as a name used anywhere, so far. I don't care terribly about keeping an HD article separate from the town article, if it might be thought better to merge it into that eventually, but I do think that an artificial name should not be coined by us, so my main point is that the name of the district does seem to be "Jonesboro Historic District". I'll put in a request for the NRHP nomination document now and will plan to develop more about the district in a few weeks after receiving it. Thanks. --doncram 20:17, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see that I was wrong earlier. According to this page on the county's GenWeb site, the simplified spelling dates to 1877, not the slightly later US federal initiative to simplify spelling. Also see this page. Regardless, as Bms4880 says, it has been Jonesborough since 1983.

I imagine that the good people of Jonesborough are unaware that anyone thinks that the old spelling of their town's name is permanently affixed to their historic district. History is a major source of local pride and economic activity in Jonesborough, where guided tours of the "Jonesborough Historic District" are one of the main tourist attractions. I doubt that anyone has told the local people who nominated their town's downtown area for the National Register back in the 1960s, say with pride that theirs "was the first town in Tennessee to be listed on the National Register of Historic Places,"[7][8] and have been maintaining and promoting the area for all these years that bureaucrats in Washington, DC, now own their historic district and now insist that it must forever use the town's old name. I doubt that anyone has told them that because it isn't true. Wikipedia looks pretty asinine if it insists that a now-dusty 42-year-old document filed in a federal government office has a unique claim on this town's reality. --Orlady (talk) 22:37, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is both weird and boring to have this discussion now. Orlady has cumulatively complained about there being articles on NRHP-listed places a few hundred times to me before. Here it is misleading for Orlady to assert with sources that "guided tours of the 'Jonesborough Historic District' are one of the main tourist attractions" when none of the sources give that name. I do see one more mention of "Jonesborough's Historic District" in one of those, but in fact not a single proper noun naming for the district. In fact, calling it "Jonesboro Historic District" as it was and apparently still is named, provides a nice historical touch reflecting the fact that the town was for much of its history named Jonesboro. Orlady has argued against use of neologisms or other coinings of terms elsewhere; here i think it would be wrong also to coin an artifical term when the quaint historic one is available and documented and accurate.

Regarding your plans to use that 42-year-old document to write an article about Jonesborough's historic district, please note that the history of the historic district has long been the main focus of Jonesborough, Tennessee and is amply documented elsewhere. See [9], [10], [11], and [12] for some examples of content that you may or not find in the document that local folks generated in 1969. --Orlady (talk) 22:52, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for those links; i'll take a look at them. No thanks for your vote of no confidence that the NRHP document will provide no information on the metes and bounds of the district, on any local arguments for it being listed, and so on. Good thing i am not looking for your approval, Orlady, in my choosing to work on wikipedia articles in the state of Tennessee. It seems pretty unwelcoming and unpleasant, that i should ask a question here on some factual matters and get back more of your sarcasm and derision. I'm pretty used to it, but i would think it would be somewhat a negative for other editors to read this shit here. --doncram 00:00, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some of this consternation might be explainable by the fact that the area is also a local historic district subject to special local regulations. The specific metes and bounds in the federal listing from 1969 are probably not of intense interest to people involved in preservation and interpretation of the area. --Orlady (talk) 03:01, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure there is a sign in the town that says, "Jonesborough Historic District," but I don't fully recall. I think Sakowski uses "Jonesborough Historic District" in her book, Touring the East Tennessee Backroads (she also says it was the first historic district in Tennessee listed on the Register). I can vouch that Jonesboroughans prefer the early, longer spelling in all things related to the town (see the first comment on the town's discussion page, for instance). Bms4880 (talk) 00:16, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A few references calling the place "Jonesborough Historic District":

• Black heritage sites: an African American odyssey and finder's guide, By Nancy C. Curtis - Link is to a section titled "Jonesborough Historic District"
• Bicycling Tennessee - Lists a place to stay in the "Jonesborough Historic District"
• America's historic places: an illustrated guide to our country's past - Lists "Jonesborough Historic District"

I found a news story from 1963 about a bill introduced that year in the state legislature to get the "ugh" restored -- that indicates that the simplified spelling had been unpopular for a long time as of 1969.

One of the reasons why I have said that the 1969 is no longer an ideal source is that much preservation activity has occurred since 1969. For example, a newspaper story I found in Newsbank says "Jonesborough was the first town in Tennessee to be listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Many historic buildings have been restored and preserved. One such building, a two-story log home and Jonesborough's oldest building, was restored and moved to Main Street's Historic District." --Orlady (talk) 03:01, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to let this conversation drop. But given a comment at Talk:Jonesboro Historic District (Jonesborough, Tennessee) i suppose maybe i should reply further. Here goes.

I'm not convinced by 3 bicycling or other guidebook type usages, where the guidebook editor had to come up with a name and there is the apparent reality of "Jonesboro Historic District" being the National Register name seemingly in contradiction to the "Historic Jonesborough" name. In small space for a bicycling guidebook, a writer doesn't want to go into explanations about the name of the town changing back and forth, or go into nuances of what is the official name or not. I'm just not convinced by those usages.

About the last quote from Newsbank, the statement that "Jonesborough was the first town" in TN to be NRHP-listed is a fair approximation which a newspaper can make, like many Orlady and I have considered before, which blurs over distinctions that a NRHP listing involves specific borders, and what is implied to be the whole town often/usually is not. I have collected the NRHP nom which shows exact borders not including a whole town and shows that the statement is imperfect (fine for a news article, but not precise). The last part of the quote shows avoidance of a formal official name for the district. I don't believe the district is formally named "Main Street's Historic District", nor do I see that quote anywhere suggesting the formal name is anything besides the NRHP listing name.

What seems most likely to me is that the official name is unchanged. And that the Historic Jonesborough as a town and self-promoting marketing organization both wants not to highlight borders of the district and wants not to highlight its name. I believe they may want to de-emphasize the district because they want to promote the town as a whole, and don't want potential tourists insisting upon staying at an inn in the official district only. Also they want to be called "Historic Jonesborough", not "Jonesboro Historic District", as a marketing decision. It seems best to me to develop an article specifically about the district, using its official name and describing it. And, probably, have a Historic Jonesborough article as a separate, more general article, or as a section in Jonesborough, Tennessee article, which summarizes from the more detailed article about the actual historic district.

I opened the discussion here to get other editors input and thank you for providing it. I hope i can plug along under that plan. --doncram 18:08, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Because you started a new discussion of this topic at Talk:Jonesboro Historic District (Jonesborough, Tennessee) the day before you posted the above reply to the comment that I had posted 26 days earlier, I have made the assumption that you decided that the discussion should move to Talk:Jonesboro Historic District (Jonesborough, Tennessee). As I noted there, I perceive this as WP:Forum shopping on your part. Whatever your intentions might have been, in order to avoid fragmenting the conversation any more than is already the case, I am not going to try to reply to you here. If you want your above comments to be part of your new discussion, please repost them there. --Orlady (talk) 17:05, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One of (if not the) first white settlers of Tennessee. Check it out! --AW (talk) 16:11, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a procedure or bot for updating population figures to reflect the 2010 census, or is it something we need to do manually? The anonymous editors of the world seem eager to update these figures, but don't like to provide sources. Bms4880 (talk) 22:50, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Discussed here. -Ichabod (talk) 03:49, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]