Talk:Simsbury, Connecticut

Discussion
An initial discussion on a users talk page can be found here Active Banana (talk) 14:56, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Drake Hill Road Bridge is very iconic to Simsbury should it be added as a landmark on this page? by 860CNL (talk)860CNL

NRHP mentions
I notice nice updating and addition of pics on the NRHP items, by editor SPhilbrick. I added or restored wikilinks for all the NRHP items. These are wikipedia notable topics, and links should be given to facilitate article creation and to facilitate getting the links correctly here. In some cases like the John Humphrey House one, another edit is needed to get the link right, because there are more than one places of that name. Also I removed month and day-date for all NRHP listings. Year of construction is of more interest; year of NRHP listing is of perhaps interest but not the exact day-date, IMO.

Also I removed "Central School, on Massaco Street", because that seems to me to be not NRHP-listed, based on checking NRIS via Elkman's tools, and the fact that no NRHP listing date/year was given. If it was recently listed (and therefore not in Elkman's system), it should be re-added. --doncram (talk) 19:09, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I think this is part of the same nomination as Horace Belden School (Simsbury Town Hall). --Polaron | Talk 19:35, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * That would make sense, as the Horace Belden School, now the Police Station et al, is also on Massaco street.


 * I just looked at Elkman's tools a few minutes ago, ironically. I'm mulling over using them to start some articles on some of the properties. I agree with doncram that date of NRHOP listing isn't that important. -- SPhilbrick  T  19:45, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * BTW, I have a picture of the Belden School, Darling House, and Simsbury Bank and Trust building. I didn't add the Darling pic, because I thought I had the wrong building, but I checked the NRHP listing, and I have the right place. I think I can add the Belden picture to the Public Safety section, because of its present use, but I'm a little worried about crowding the NRHP section with any more pics. I've expanded the description, partly to lengthen the section, and partly because I think a longer description is warranted, even if there is a separate article (as in the case of the Amos Eno house). I suppose I could add a gallery, but I'm not a big fan of galleries, if only because I note I don't tend to look at them much in other articles, I prefer images that are more clearly tied in to the text. Finally, I don't like the Amos Eno Pic. It seemed like the natural viewpoint, because that is the main entrance, but I think I'll try a version from in front, which may be more picturesque.-- SPhilbrick  T  19:55, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

History
I'm working on adding some of the early history. The section will read a bit disjointed as I add some material, hope to have it in good order by the weekend, but posting this if you note some lack of flow while I work on it. -- SPhilbrick  T  02:09, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Convert ref style
I converted the refs to LDR style, and questions, just ask, but it does make it easier to read the editing page-- SPhilbrick  T  01:47, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Removing templates
A request for cleanup was added in May, but I don't see any specifics, other than a discussion about external links. There was also a separate request for expansion of the history section.

I have substantially expanded the history section. There is still work to do, as I really only filled in the history up to the King Philip war (1676) leaving a lot of history to be written. Some subsequent history was there before, but the discussion of the Revolutionary war period and more recent history needs addition. I plan to work on it, and once done, we may have to discuss whether the section becomes too long. In any event, I think enough has been added to remove the template.

Separately, I've added a number of images, and done some general cleanup. I won't pretend it is ready for FA review or even GA review, but I think it is progressed enough to remove the cleanup template. As always, if someone disagrees, please replace it, but please add some specifics.-- SPhilbrick  T  14:18, 6 October 2010 (UTC)