Talk:Timeline of Baltimore

Page layout
Any interest in revising the article layout? The current design is fine, but by comparison, the design of Timeline of the San Francisco Bay Area streamlines the layout of years with multiple events (centered headings, fewer bullet points, etc.). Following the San Francisco model, the layout of the Timeline of Boston was recently revised; see changes here. Thoughts? -- M2545 (talk) 09:19, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Acknowledgment
Thank you to Rollins College via the Wikipedia Visiting Scholars program for access to subscription databases used in compiling this article. -- M2545 (talk) 15:36, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Timeline of Baltimore. 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/20150327213059/http://www.baltimoregrassrootsmedia.org/PublicAccessTV/HistoryTimeline/HistoryTimeline.html to http://www.baltimoregrassrootsmedia.org/PublicAccessTV/HistoryTimeline/HistoryTimeline.html
 * Added tag to http://usmayors.org/meetmayors/mayorsatglance.asp
 * Added tag to http://archivists.metapress.com/content/2512804653401xh3/fulltext.pdf

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) 11:47, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Split
I've split off the pre-20th century history, to reduce the enormous page size. A bot should fix up the missing inline references shortly, but please will someone familar with the subject review the non-inline references section, and copy relevant titles to the new articles? Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:31, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Would that splitting this were the solution. There's so much unsourced original research here by the 169 range--the 'Baltimore historian' who has added anecdotal commentary across dozens of articles--that this can be dramatically cut. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 17:32, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
 * So fix it. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:16, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I may yet, . The unsourced, original research and personal commentary looks to have been added by block evasion IPs of . There are two concerns with my doing mass reversions/deletions. The first is basic housekeeping, that of picking through masses of content to remove unsourced without deleting good stuff. The second is doing so as an IP, since mass deletions are apt to be misconstrued as vandalism. The community is increasingly filled with editors who can not discern the validity of such corrections, coming from an unregistered account. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 14:55, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * It goes back years. The blocked account was often editing from a Baltimore library without logging in, well before the block. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 15:00, 17 December 2019 (UTC)