Talk:John Adolphus Etzler

The Notability Issue
I can't imagine why the notability of this topic would be in question since it has historical significance even with the limited information listed in the article. The fact that this article is based on the real personage of an article that prompted an essay by Henry David Thoreau, Paradise (to be) Regained, should in itself provide enough substantiation of its merit and its retention. It simply appears to be a target of Wikipedians that are a little light (upstairs) on the importance of historical articles being included in an encyclopedia. It is undoubtedly more important that we have articles on fictitious television characters and professional athletes who, although part of society, don't actually make any contributions to it. Or it may simply be the result of efforts by someone from another culture that has less than zero knowledge about the historical importance of the topic Utopianism at hand, and particularly its role in American history... My point is that this article should not be deleted, most especially for its notability. The ignorance of one, should not be the burden and cost of everyone else... Stevenmitchell (talk) 09:33, 24 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm going to assume that this rant (along with this cryptic message) was triggered by the tag added to the article. The purpose of the notability tag is to highlight when an article does not sufficiently demonstrate why an individual is noteworthy: it is not a badge of shame saying that the person is not noteworthy, but a cleanup tag asking editors to better demonstrate that. I've re-added the tag, and do not expect it to be removed again without the article having been improved to the point where an ignoramus such as myself can glance upon it and quickly come to understand why the subject has an article here. Right now, readers are apparently expected to dig through the academic essay tacked onto the bottom of the article to understand this. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 17:34, 24 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I've added some material to the article. More could be added, but it would take time, especially given the standards of scholarship that are rightly called for, and the effort needed to master Wikipedia's formatting conventions and other details. Etzler's story I find fascinating, at any rate, and I hope others will see the value of including an article on such an interesting subject. Mkper9 (talk) 18:14, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

I softened the overly-menacing template - it's the kind that discourages new editors and further development. (Who'd put work into something that might be killed? Bad tactic.) IMO there's no question of notability: The guy was a protege of Roebling; his ideas were influential enough for Thoreau to criticize -at length-, and a brand-new green-tech book (Madrigal, 2011) devotes an early chapter to Etzler and his vision, and soon discusses Thoreau's objections. Great subject, very interesting person (seen his drawings yet? remind you of da Vinci?); please add more! Twang (talk) 09:47, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John Adolphus Etzler. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111008061528/http://www.greentechhistory.com/2009/04/utopianism-etzler-and-technologys-impact-on-democracy to http://www1.broward.edu/~jnydahl/etzler.htm

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:04, 24 April 2017 (UTC)