Talk:Sea Bright, New Jersey

NY -- Newark UA
It's printed all over the census map. What is it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.246.212.247 (talk) 12:46, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

rock walls
is it true that the rocks for the walls came from the building of the Holland and Lincoln tunnels? If so, this is a very interesting fact and should be added to the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.243.237.95 (talk) 12:35, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Nauvoo
The Mormon connection proposed is completely speculative, completely unsourced, and published in a Mormon-oriented publication. The fishing village dates back to when Smith was...15, by the look of it. (About 50 years old in 1868, according to Harper's.) Anmccaff (talk) 14:58, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

PS:Adding a wiki-circular cite does not help. Anmccaff (talk) 15:03, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Now it's two wiki-circular cites.... Anmccaff (talk) 15:05, 2 May 2017 (UTC)


 * See the sources in the article from Ensign, a notable Mormon-oriented publication (which is a source in and of itself), as well as those added from the borough's website and from The New York Times. Our goal is not to establish truth, which is what you seem to be trying to do. The borough cites this material and the Times cites an historian. I'm not sure what you're case is here. Alansohn (talk) 15:07, 2 May 2017 (UTC)


 * No. The Ensign has an obvious POV problem here, and it is admittedly completely speculative, and filled with weasel-wording.  The Seabright borough source is based on wikibullshit, a circular cite, and the NYT on that, or wiki, or both.  It is not ascribed even to the local historian, Mr. Moss. Let's see a contemporaneous source with some standing, not propaganda for real-estate salesmen.  Anmccaff (talk) 15:17, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I'll call wikibullshit here. The sources all stand on their own; the municipality believes it to be the case, the LDS Church does and the Times cites it. You can challenge any one of them with some hint of legitimacy, but you can't knock them all out under any Wikipedia rule or regulation. If you can find a policy that requires a "contemporaneous source with some standing", there might be something to discuss here. Other than that you're just playing a game of denialism. Alansohn (talk) 15:41, 2 May 2017 (UTC)


 * The Seabright source, which appears to date from 2016 -earliest Wayback - says:


 * Settlement in the area of Sea Bright began in the early 1840s, with a fishing community of simple shacks near the beach dunes that was called “Nauvoo”. While many local historians had interpreted the name as a Native American word, the origin of “Nauvoo” is Sephardic Hebrew, from the same word that Mormon leader Joseph Smith gave to the Illinois town he founded in 1839. Meaning literally “beautiful or pleasant place,” New Jersey’s Nauvoo might well have been named by Smith, as he visited Monmouth County in 1840. (Capture from 30 Nov 2016.)


 * Here's Wiki from a year prior to that.


 * "Settlement in the area of Sea Bright began in the early 1840s, with a fishing community of simple shacks near the beach dunes that was called "Nauvoo". While many local historians had interpreted the name as a Native American word, the origin of "Nauvoo" is Sephardic Hebrew, from the same word that Mormon leader Joseph Smith gave to the Illinois town he founded in 1839. Meaning literally "beautiful or pleasant place," New Jersey's Nauvoo might well have been named by Smith, as he visited Monmouth County in 1840.[20]


 * "One of the earliest accounts of the barrier beach, published a dozen years before Sea Bright's existence, describes a steamboat journey from New York to the Ocean House, a low rambling wooden structure situated on the beach opposite the mouth of the Navesink River. Built in 1842, this first hotel on the sandy strip offered "excellent fishing, fine sea bathing and capital accomodations" for three hundred patrons. At the Ocean House one "found a number of beach carriages", as they are called, awaiting the arrival of the boat from New York City to take passengers to Long Branch."


 * Wayback is silent on older versions ofthis URL, but a little digging shows that the borough previously used "sea-bright.com"


 * Now, when did this show up on wiki, and how?


 * This diff shows that it showed up uncited, in nearly the same form as now, pointing to the possible cause-and-effect here. Oh, and who posted it?  Alansohn (talk.  Uncited, let's take another look then,, on the archived city cite.


 * The earliest version I've found on wayback of the .com URL:


 * Long an enigma to local historians and often misinterpreted as an Indian word, the origin of "Nauvoo" is Sephardic Hebrew. It is clearly the same word that Mormon leader Joseph Smith gave to the Illinois town he founded in 1839. Meaning literally "beautiful of pleasant place," Nauvoo (N.J.) might well have been named by Smith as he visited Monmouth County in 1839. In an event, moved by Mormon influence, Nauvoo was the name chosen by local fisherman for their tiny settlement on the Jersey Coast.


 * One of the earliest accounts of the barrier beach, published a dozen years before Sea Bright's existence, describes a steamboat journey from New York to the Ocean House, a low rambling wooden structure situated on the beach opposite the mouth of the Navesink River. Built in 1842, this first hotel on the sandy strip offered "excellent fishing, fine sea bathing and capital accomodations" for three hundred patrons. At the Ocean House one "found a number of beach carriages", as they are called, awaiting the arrival of the boat from New York to take passengers to Long Branch.


 * (Note, by the way, the transcription error, "an" for "any." Note also the identical(mis)spelling of "accommodations.") Now, that looks like plagiarism, doesn't it? Only question is whose, . Did you lift it from them, or vice-versa? Anmccaff (talk) 18:27, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
 * So we have a quandary here. We have three sources where there is no doubt that there is independent verification -- the LDS magazine, the New York Times and the Red Bank Register -- all supporting the claim. It could be that the borough website was copied from the Wikipedia article, which leaves us stuck at three sources. If this edit of mine from 11 years is vandalism on my part, then we have a fourth independent source from the borough website. Your newest archived version of the borough website is from a decade after my edit, so there's no proof either way. I don't have a definitive alibi here, but then again I can't prove where I was on November 22, 1963, during the John F. Kennedy Assassination.You've raised an interesting paradox and offered intriguing evidence of an alleged crime well past the end of the statute of limitations, but you've done nothing to rebut the claim about the derivation of Nauvoo from Hebrew. Alansohn (talk) 20:58, 2 May 2017 (UTC)


 * No quandry...and no statute of limitations, either, here. Plagiarism is plagiarism, self-sourcing is self-sourcing, and POV-pushing is POV_pushing.  You want to open this at ANI as soon as I revert, be my guest.


 * First, the NYT times cite is low-quality; real estate sections are notoriously bad, even in otherwise good publications, by themselves they are just about worthless, and this one appears to be, surprise, surprise, borrowed either directly or indirectly from wiki, i.e. from your own words. So, no borough cite, it's unsourced, and almost goes back to wiki, also. Washing your own opinion through other sources which uses them uncritically weakens them rather than strengthening them.


 * Next, the "Red Bank Register" cite does not support your contention; it says the opposite.


 * Sea Bright is about four feet above sea level and is protected on the seaward side by an 11-foot-high stone wall along the sand dunes. Long ago, the Indians called it Nauvoo, which means bright sea. [The late Monmouth County historian, George H. Moss, Jr., in his book Another Look at Nauvoo to the Hook (1990) stated that Nauvoo was not an Indian word but Sephardic Hebrew, meaning “beautiful or pleasant place,” and that it might have been named by Mormon leader Joseph Smith who visited Monmouth County in 1839 and used the same name for the town he founded in Illinois.] After the Battle of Monmouth, the British retreated this way and fled on ships anchored in Sandy Hook Bay. One of their sloops foundered in a storm. It had 100,000 pounds sterling aboard and, in the 1930s, a little girl digging in the sand came up with six gold coins in the image of George III.


 * It says it is an Indian word, but notes in brackets that the local historian thinks otherwise. That is not a cite in support of your claim.  This is an altered cite, and honestly marked as such.  What does the original cite say?


 * the "Ensign" piece explicitly notes that speculation is involved:


 * The earliest non-Mormon use of Nauvoo is in reference to a small fishing village of about 50 men and boys in Monmouth County on the New Jersey shore (now a part of Sea Bright). Although direct evidence is thus far lacking, this Nauvoo was most likely the result of a missionary trip by Joseph Smith and Orson Pratt into Monmouth County from Philadelphia during January 1840.


 * Hardly bullet-proof proof.


 * There is no need to rebut the claim about the derivation of Nauvoo from Hebrew; Fawn Brodie did it years ago. The current "Sephardic Hebrew" canard was the Mormon response; it's possible, but it is at least equally possible that Joe Smith, like some other people around this subject, was just making stuff up, and the later search for an etymon was just damage control. Anmccaff (talk) 21:56, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The claim of "Hardly bullet-proof proof." demonstrates the problem here. While I'm trying to show that reliable and verifiable sources make the claim, you're trying to prove that the claim is false. You need to show consensus for your changes here and can't simply analyze your claim and make yourself winner. I will restore the status quo ante, with the added sources and await evidence that consensus supports your position. Alansohn (talk) 22:37, 5 May 2017 (UTC)


 * When reliable sources disagree, you use both, not flip a coin to choose one as the correct one. There is no truth, just information from reliable sources ... and those sources often disagree. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 04:04, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

When reliable sources disagree, you use both,...
..you wrote,, yet you just did the opposite, restoring a version which ignored a major historian (and Seabright resident), Jim Bishop. Bishop disagreed both on the source of the town name and the meaning of "Nauvoo."

Regarding the plagiarism or self-sourcing, if you believe that two pieces of writing will often separately evolve to the same form, right down to a shared misspelling, that is, I suppose your right, but don't expect too many people to agree with you. Anmccaff (talk) 05:07, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

"Whence Sea Bright?"
This cite Sea Bright, Rumson Road, Oceanic, Monmouth Beach, Atlantic Highlands, Leonardville Road, Navesink, Water Witch Club : concerning summer homes along the shores of Monmouth County, New Jersey, published in 1903 by the Sea Bright Sentinel, gives the following::

SEA BRIGHT is a name that often stands for more than the incorporated borough. Parts of Rumson Road and Monmouth Beach are commonly referred to as Sea Bright, for the borough is a center for a larger outlying com- munity which may be naturally and properly included in Greater Sea Bright.

The Sea Bright postoffice serves Rumson Road residents and also Nortli Monmouth Beach. Having its postal address and depending upon its stores and business men for constant service the distinction between Sea Bright and Rumson Road and Monmouth Beach becomes one of sectional division mere- ly — all are properly parts of Greater Sea Bright.

The Golf Club, Polo Grounds and Tennis Clubhouse are all on Rumson Road, and are yet equally Sea Bright enterprises.

Whence the name Sea Bright? It was bestowed by a woman, Mrs. Martha Stevens, of Castle Point, Hoboken. Mrs. Stevens was one of the first comers. Mr. M. Paul, also a first comer, suggested the name, St. Paul-on-the-Shrewsbury, but was voted down in favor of Mrs. Stevens' suggestion by his associates, Messrs. Shippen and Dod.

That's the person known to Wiki as Martha Bayard Stevens, she of the Stevens Institute. She was not a person averse to property development. Anmccaff (talk) 06:48, 7 May 2017 (UTC)


 * I agree ALL explanations should be included, including the Martha Stevens anecdote. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 13:20, 7 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Ummm, no. You do -not- agree,, you assert.  To agree, you have to have someone you are agreeing with.  If an unimpeachable source describing the name origin is found, then there is no reason to include the folk etymologies, guesses, and hand-waving. Anmccaff (talk) 13:55, 7 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Ummm, no., if you have an alternate source for an alternate claim, then add it. Removing extensive portions of sourced material to push your arbitrary stance is thinly veiled vandalism. Alansohn (talk) 14:51, 7 May 2017 (UTC)


 * In this case, that comes down to proving a negative. For "Sea Bright, New Jersey" to be named for a "the place in England", there has to be such a place; there is not, at least as far as the usual reliable sources would suggest.  We also have a reliable source, Jim Bishop who suggests (wrongly, I suspect) a completely different etymology.


 * I think someone who has either self-sourced material or plagiarized it really should be a little more careful about using phrases like thinly veiled vandalism. Anmccaff (talk) 15:02, 7 May 2017 (UTC)


 * "SEA BRIGHT (est. 1889): The official explanation is the borough is named after Sea Bright, England. However, there is no Sea Bright, England."


 * Erik Larson, of the Asbury Park Press. Anmccaff (talk) 16:07, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Dubious uses of Dubious tag
Template:Dubious is clear that these tags, when used in articles, should be discussed at the corresponding talk page. I removed the claim that "the only contemporaneous source mentioned here suggests it was decades earlier." The article had been changed to state that before Ocean House opened in 1842, the area was a simple fishing community; there's is no statement about earliest settlement, which was removed to address your concerns, real or imagined. I'm not sure that there is any contemporary source that contradicts that claim. If you are talking about earliest settlement and have a reliable, verifiable, contemporaneous and utterly unimpeachable source, why not add it to the article. Alansohn (talk) 04:24, 10 May 2017 (UTC)


 * The big problem the article faces isn't lack of cites, it's lack of judgement in using them. When a cite that says "might", "maybe" "could be seen as" &cet is used to say "is", there "might", "maybe" "could be seen as" &cet be a problem.  Anmccaff (talk) 16:25, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

in re Smith ( linguistic powers section)
The city of the Mormons; or, Three days at Nauvoo in 1842 By Henry Caswall

...according to which, in 1842, Smith was unable to read some Greek script, claiming it was "Egyptian." Anmccaff (talk) 17:18, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

"Egyptian' etymology is solidly sourced.
No "synthesis" in the wikipedian sense, is involved; we have an official LDS publication making the claim, and we have a very, very, famous historiographic episode explaining the cobbled-up etymology seen here. Anmccaff (talk) 04:21, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Great. Put in an article about Nauvoo or Nauvoo, Illinois. There is no source that attributes an Egyptian derivation to Nauvoo, New Jersey, the place now known as Sea Bright. This is the very definition of WP:SYNTH: "Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources." This is exactly what you've done here: Some other place named "Nauvoo" is of Egyptian derivation, therefore this place is of Egyptian derivation. Alansohn (talk) 21:56, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

New York Times source based on Wiki?!
To add bullshit to the egregious problems here is the claim made in this edit, that a source from The New York Times "Appears to be a cite based on Wiki itself" and should be removed. The editor who removed the material here fails to realize that the source from The Times -- "In the Region/New Jersey; 20 Million-Dollar Homes Planned in Sea Bright" -- is dated March 21, 2004.By that date, the Sea Bright article had two edits. Click here to see what the article looked like in March 2004 and let me know which part of the newspaper article was copied from Wikipedia. Alansohn (talk) 16:24, 30 May 2017 (UTC)