Talk:Sandy Hook

Opening comment
I changed the name from Sandy Hook, New Jersey to Sandy Hook (New Jersey) to reflect the fact that it is a geographical feature, not a municipality. -- Decumanus 22:37, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Sandy Hook Isn't in Middletown
Sandy Hook's entrance is in Sea Bright. *sandy hook is part of fort hancock a coast guard base and has its own zip code
 * It is. See this map showing Sandy Hook as part of Middletown Township, despite the fact that it is noncontiguous via land. Alansohn 19:28, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Should we explain that this is because Sandy Hook is what was left over when Sea Bright was subtracted from Middletown? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:00, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
 * "The Story of New Jersey's Civil Boundaries: 1606–1968" states on page 16 that "The Sandy Hook area is unique in New Jersey in that it is not included in the boundaries of any municipality." This is referenced to a personal communication the author had with a J. Russell Woolley, the Monmouth County Clerk in 1966. Is the author wrong? Did Middletown annex it after 1966? Might the Census Bureau be mistaken? (wouldn't be the first time. Armandtanzarian (talk) 22:13, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * This is an excellent question. Old maps from the mid-1800s show Sandy Hook as having been part of Ocean Township back when it extended all the way up the coast.  It became part of Eatontown after the town split from Ocean in the 1870s.  In the decades following, a bunch of new municipalities were created from Eatontown along the coast, which probably meant Sandy Hook became non-contiguous with the rest of Eatontown further south.  Now, did that land disincorporate at some point along the way, finally being handed over to Middletown after 1968, or was the territory transfered when Sandy Hook found itself closer to Middletown than the rest of Eatontown?  98.221.141.21 (talk) 10:00, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Requested Move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the proposal was move the page to Sandy Hook, per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 09:14, 15 April 2008 (UTC) Sandy Hook, New Jersey → Sandy Hook — This geographical feature is the primary usage of the name; it's not a settlement, not having been settled since Fort Hancock was decommissioned in 1972. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:07, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Survey

 * Support as nom. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:07, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Support. Google hits show that the New Jersey barrier peninsula is the most common usage. PeterSymonds | talk  19:12, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Discussion

 * ''Please place long comments here.

This will imply moving Sandy Hook to Sandy Hook (disambiguation), to make room. A dab header here should follow. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:10, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Problems with this article
There is a huge POV towards Sandy Hook being a military installation, a site for history buffs; there is very little attention to the fact that it has become a major tourist site for beachgoers, bikers, sailboaters. One editor consistently has been removing photos which suggest the beach theme. The article needs greater balance.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 01:55, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The photos which this editor wishes to put into the article are absolutely generic shots of people having fun on the beach. They tell nothing about Sandy Hook, there's not even any indication that they were taken on Sandy Hook (although I don't doubt that they were.) They add not a thing at all to the article.  Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a travel guide, or a promotional brochure put out by the local Chamber of Commerce to attract visitors. In retaliation for my removal of these useless shots, the editor is removing pictures of the ruins of the military installations on Sandy Hook, which, of course, illustrate the beach's long and significant history of use by the military for the protection of New York Bay.  Editors should comment here on the relative usefullness of these images. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:12, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I disagree. Most people come to Sandy Hook for the beach. At present, there are NO photos of people swimming or surfing or doing any beach-related activity. The photos tell people that there is a beach, that people love to swim in the ocean there. The current article suggests Sandy Hook is some kind of military base only, or a historical military site, only.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 02:19, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Sandy Hook is NOW a tourist spot. How long has it been a tourist spot?  What is the history of it being a tourist spot?  Back up your assertion that it is a tourist spot with historical facts and references.  There are many facts and details that Sandy Hook was a VERY significant military location during WW II and the Cold War for the defense of NY city and the east coast, which are not even included here.  Maybe add some history about the National Park or the ferry docks.  Please don't complain that the article is unbalanced if you don't want to do anything to fix it.  Also see "My two cents" comment below about the pictures.Plmerry (talk) 09:09, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * And there other photos of Sandy Hook to choose from if these two are not acceptable. Note: these photos were deleted summarily by one contributor who insists that his view of what this article is about is the only one.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 02:25, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
 * These photos offer no context at all. They could be anywhere. Photos of tourists or beachgoers identifiably at Sandy Hook would be of value. These are "how I spent my summer vacation". Leave 'em out.  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  08:52, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

My two cents: The pictures above, except first and fourth (starting from left), tell me nothing about Sandy Hook that would not be seen on any beach. The 1st pictures gives me a geographical perspective of Sandy Hooks closeness to NY City and the importance it would have played geographically to the history of the city. The fourth picture does depict the extent and the contiguous quality of the beach which someone not from the area would not necessarily understand or comprehend. Both of these pictures paint a great dichotomy between a scenic tranquil beach and the city in the background, which if I'm not mistaken is part of the charm/beauty of Sandy Hook. Also I would like to see the two deleted pictures depicting the military use added back to the page. Plmerry (talk) 07:37, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Very belated followup. I think either would be good; however, which beaches at Sandy Hook were they taken from?  That should be added to the description.    --Erp (talk) 04:11, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Shooting Reference
Is there any way the introductory paragraph referring to commonly confused topics could be changed? Instead of referencing the Sandy Hook shooting, I think it would be more appropriate to simply refer to Sandy Hook, Conn. (the place) in general. (If readers are still in need of finding information about the shooting, it should be accessible from that page.) Treyhazard2001 (talk) 20:41, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Title name changed - and its still not proper
I notice that this article formerly was "Sandy Hook, New Jersey" and there's discussion here regarding moving it to "Sandy Hook" as the main article that uses that name, and it not being proper for a geographic feature to be named "Name, State". I don't object to keeping the state name in the title, but properly, it should be "Sandy Hook (New Jersey)", since its a geographic feature, not a settlement. Famartin (talk) 07:46, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Mathglot (talk) 10:43, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Agreed as well. Castncoot (talk) 12:18, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Article has been moved back to Sandy Hook. For a discussion regarding a change of the article's title, please follow the steps outlined at WP:RM. 162 etc. (talk) 05:43, 20 April 2023 (UTC)