Talk:Jedediah Sanger

GA nomination
Hello ,

I was looking at this article to review, but it needs a bit of reorganization. Instead of reviewing it, how about if I reorganize it a bit with the hope that it will be easier to review going forward?–CaroleHenson (talk) 06:10, 6 May 2020 (UTC)


 * It is obvious that you have done a great deal of research. It would be good, though, to hone it down to its finer points. And, if there is a way to roll up the subsections into fewer sections, that would be great. I hope you agree that condensing, but still maintaining content in notes will make it easier for the average reader, but the detail is there for readers interested in that level of detail. (i.e., unless the content is summarized, I wouldn't and others wouldn't likely pass it due to GA criteria #3b - lack of focus / too much detail.)


 * I have done a fair amount tonight, but I still think that content in the New York section could be summarized. It would be good to add more info into the introduction. And a nice-to-have would be to put the list info into prose.–CaroleHenson (talk) 08:27, 6 May 2020 (UTC)


 * This is ✅. I summarized the lists and put the lists in notes, regrouped some of the subsections, added more to the intro, and summarized a bit more. I wasn't able to condense the number of sections - it made more sense to regroup (like into settlement / land development, turnpikes, civic leadership).–CaroleHenson (talk) 18:14, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I wasn't able to remove the number of subsections, but I added the to cut out the 4th level. To make it so that only level 2 headings are in the TOC, the limit could be set to 2.–CaroleHenson (talk) 23:03, 6 May 2020 (UTC)


 * I posted a message here about reviewing the article after doing a lot of work on it.–CaroleHenson (talk) 19:17, 6 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Based upon the response, I won't review the article. I've been adding some images. I hope you like the way it's come along.–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:03, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Questions
You have researched this article incredibly well! I just have a couple of questions: –CaroleHenson (talk) 16:18, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * More out of curiosity than anything else, do you know if Jedediah inherited any property from his father?
 * I don't understand how the main, legendary lot that sold as 492 acres was surveyed at 600 acres. It doesn't fit the math. The math for the total 909 acres is 492 acres + 183-acre lot + 234-acre lot. Is the sentence about the survey right? If so, that would make the total 1017 acres.


 * , thanks for all your work on the article. Right now due to RL, I have almost no time for WP for a few weeks. I'll try to quickly answer these questions.


 * 1. I did not find any mention of any inheritance. It seems like he struck out on his own and was self-made.
 * 2. The numbers should not add up. The "legend" said Sanger bought 1000 acres and sold half for the price of the whole lot. It's not mentioned in the article, but I believe the legend said Sanger bought a single 1000 acre parcel, and the creek ran through diagonally splitting it into two 500 acres parcels, and he sold the land on one side of the creek to Higbee.


 * The Higbee parcel was recorded in the deed as 492 acres (roughly matching the legend's 500 acres) when he bought it from Sanger. It was later, sometime in the next 100 years, found to be closer to 600 acres.


 * The 909 acres is just what Sanger was thought to have owned using the numbers from the late 18th century; 909 acres is close to the 1000 acres of the legend, (although it was never one big parcel). MB 02:34, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * , Hey, great to see you. I don't know what rl is, but good luck with it!
 * I think I wasn't clear. I have discounted the 1000 after reading and have believed the land deed records to be accurate. I taken at face value that Higbee bought (or thought he bought) 492 acres. I also take at face value that there was a survey, but am confused about how it could have been 108 acres off the deed for the land.
 * I am sensing that there is no way to solve this riddle, but just lay out the facts, as you did quite ably.–CaroleHenson (talk) 02:49, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I am sensing that there is no way to solve this riddle, but just lay out the facts, as you did quite ably.–CaroleHenson (talk) 02:49, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I am sensing that there is no way to solve this riddle, but just lay out the facts, as you did quite ably.–CaroleHenson (talk) 02:49, 7 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Oh, I've got it - rl = real life. I am retired now, took a minute to compute.–CaroleHenson (talk) 02:55, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Gravestone inscription
- The image of the Gravestone inscription was a bit fuzzy, so I reduced the size to 80% (shown here), still fuzzy. So I typed out the inscription from the image.

But, I can also see that the fuzzy image has kind of a historical feel - partly due to the Times font that I was not able to format. What do you think is the best?–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:46, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

I figured out how to change the font! So, here's a third option.–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:55, 6 May 2020 (UTC)


 * I like the third option, but I think the line breaks should match the original since I assume the original is a faithful representation of the actual carving. MB 02:37, 7 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Okay, cool. ✅. I also fixed the punctuation earlier in the article so that it's the same as the original.–CaroleHenson (talk) 02:52, 7 May 2020 (UTC)