Talk:P. Robinson Fur Cutting Company

National Register of Historic Places Low‑importance

	National Register of Historic Places portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places 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.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Connecticut Low‑importance

	Connecticut portal 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.ConnecticutWikipedia:WikiProject ConnecticutTemplate:WikiProject ConnecticutConnecticut articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.

Wikipedians in Connecticut may be able to help!

The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Pollution sourcing[edit]

I moved the "citation needed" tag to the claim that the factory polluted the river, as that is what needs support, and i retained the source that i had added previously. I think it's useful to have more sources than fewer. That source supports the general pollution levels of the river.

By the way, as a kid i played in the river right there with my brother, and saw deformed fish and crayfish and frogs. That's personal experience. I'll work on a literary source but thought you might be interested to know that. SageRad (talk) 19:56, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why? If it's OR to say something outright, then it's also OR imply it. Geogene (talk) 20:08, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why what? I don't understand your comment at all. To imply what? To say what outright? I agree we need a source if that claim has been challenged, and the "cn" tag is what that's for. I don't understand your comment, could you please explain more, Geogene? Thanks. SageRad (talk) 20:10, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The claim in question is that that specific company polluted the river in a big way. The following sentence, saying that the river is still polluted, reinforces that uncited, questionable assertion. Did the company pollute the river or not? If there's no source that said it did, then implying it did (with the second sentence) is OR. Adding a source to the OR just makes it more problematic, not less. That isn't fixing the problem, it's making it worse. Geogene (talk) 20:41, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, i see what you mean now. I'll look for sourcing then. Removed until adequate sourcing found. SageRad (talk) 21:09, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]