Talk:Town of Pines, Indiana

Name of Pines?
I find that I cannot edit the name of this page, due to my both not finding my old password and my old e-mail account being defunct. So I had to settle for changing it within the page and writing this here. Pines is only the Town of Pines in the same sense that its neighbors are the Town of Beverly Shores and the City of Michigan City. Why is Pines listed as the Town of Pines rather than Pines? I don't know. I assume a long spiel here on the subject of place names is not desired. Pines' name presumably came from the township name (Pine Township) but the subdividers and the incorporaters did not leave a handy explanation behind them. IanHistor 21:47, 29 June 2006 (UTC) Do you other people actually enjoy this? It's ungenerous of me but I really am tired of it. I just plain do not get why people can't grasp that Pines' name is Pines. "correct town name, its official name is Town of Pines" Of course, all of Porter County's towns' names officially include "Town of". Why the heck didn't you go look up the other towns' official names, see that each of them begins with "Town of", and then "correct" those, too, to Town of Beverly Shores, Town of Burns Harbor, Town of Chesterton, Town of Dune Acres, Town of Hebron, Town of Kouts, Town of Ogden Dunes, and Town of Porter? Why the heck are you all just picking on Pines? Do you really believe that Pines' full legalease (legaleze?) name is "Town of Town of Pines"? Well, it is not. "Everything I can find seems to indicate that 'Town of' is part of the name, like places with '___ City' in their names, not just an indication of its municipal status" Likewise, why the heck are you picking on Pines? Why didn't you go change Michigan City's article to "City of Michigan City"? That's the only municipality around here which includes either the word city or town in it's name. Why does someone from Ohio feel compelled to come here and make this imbecilic change to this article, without even looking to see how each other local municipality is treated in the same position? I corrected an old error but then, 3 years later, you figure you're hot-stuff for finding that old error and changing the piece back. Errors at Wikipedia can never be long-term corrected because someone will always find then and bring them back. That stinks about Wikipedia.

But then Wikipedia is just a collection of jokes. "The commercial airport closest to Town of Pines is the Gary/Chicago International Airport in Gary." I will give anyone out there a million dollars if you can find one Pines resident who has ever used Gary's airport. It's mentioned because that is the hobby of a Wikipedia poster. It makes no more sense than including that the closest stretch of tollway to Pines is I-90 in Jackson Township. So what? That has nothing to do with Pines.IanHistor (talk) 06:39, 19 October 2009 (UTC)


 * For the record, the town's official name is Town of Pines, and not merely in the same way as, say, "Town of Beverly Shores". It's listed specifically as Town of Pines by just about every major source for place names, including the U.S. Census Bureau, Google Maps (note the absence of "Town of" in any other town's name), and the U.S. Board on Geographic Names (which does have a municipal listing for "Town of Town of Pines", by the way.) Leaving out "Town of" in the name would be akin to leaving out the "City" in Michigan City, Indiana. TheCatalyst31 Reaction•Creation 23:40, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

WOW! This is sure scary. Thank you for giving me some insight into how on earth the terrorists of today could actually believe the things they do. Because they were told it's so. I thought I lived in the United States of America. You seriously believe that the federal government determines what incorporated municipalities of each state are to be officially named rather than those individual states which incorporated those communities? Why on earth would you imagine such a thing? How on earth do you Wikipedians get this idea that we should look to federal sources, such as the USPS or Census Bureau or the US Bd on Geographic Names, let alone sources such as Google Maps, for info about locally incorporated towns' names? One has nothing to do with the other. I can find you national sources which claim that all Americans should be killed to cleanse the earth. Do you believe that makes it so? They have nothing less to do with Pines' name than the US Census Bur. I realize it's official Wikipedia policy that primary research is not allowed, and published material must be cited, but citing incorrect claims (in your case, due to those sources having previously relied on other incorrect claims themselves) does not have anything to do with the truth. "the town's official name is Town of Pines, and not merely in the same way as, say, 'Town of Beverly Shores'." No, you are lying. "It's listed specifically as Town of Pines by just about every major source for place names" which has nothing to do with the truth. I'll very happily bet you a thousand bucks that I can find a thousand errors in Google Maps' data. Hundreds of people claim that the Who was the first heavy metal band. That does not make it so. Thousands of people insist & are sure that Barack Obama wasn't born in America. What that proves is that they're nuts, not that our President is an alien. Please please please visit one of the urban legend web-sites and you shall see that what many sources agreeing with each other shows is that errors are constantly repeated and reinforce each other; errors never die. Citing erroneous information does not prove that it is true. "Leaving out 'Town of' in the name would be akin to leaving out the 'City' in Michigan City, Indiana." No, you are 100% wrong and doomed to be so forever, as long as you follow the Wikipedia policy of caring entirely about what has been published before and caring zip for what is actually true. Theoretically it sure should be nice that so many people are willing to volunteer to spend their time on Wikipedia for no pay but why oh why are none of them interested in factual truth but rather just in sharing their fun at having found big-name sources disagreeing with the local facts of the matter?http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2009/11/02/091102crbo_books_kolbert?currentPage=1IanHistor (talk) 09:07, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Certainly stating that the nearest commercial airport is the one on Gary is rather silly.
 * However, in regards to your other point, there do seems to be quite a number of sources that state that the name of this town is "Town of Pines". Can you, Ian, provide any evidence that it's just "Pines".  I know from my familiarity with the area that no area resident ever actually refers to it as "Town of Pines", but then again they could just be shortening the name for convenience sake, like the way that Michigan City is sometimes just referred to as "City".
 * So, while I sympathize with you, it's up to you to provide evidence that the official name is "Pines". Maybe a photo of the "Welcome to . . . " sign, or a copy of the official town letterhead, or some such.  Whaddya think?? Mr. Harman (talk) 06:01, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

It's nice to hear from someone else familiar with around here for a change (rather than distant people who entirely rely on distant sources) but, no, as I've commented many times in many Wiki threads, as long as the official Wiki policy is to require published sources and deny primary research, I'm never gonna turn up reliable info proving this town's name. I could scrounge up lots of published uses of just "Pines" in daily newspapers but those, while meeting Wiki's criteria, would be no more reliable than looking to the claims of a bum in the gutter. (If you're familiar with our local papers here, you understand that jibe.) Yes, I could break down, send a request to Pines' government (as they don't happen to have a daily staffed municipal building, as in e.g. Michigan City), but I'm too lazy or mean-spirited or interested in my experiment in just how uninterested Wikipedia policy-makers are in factual accuracy vs. casual proofs. There's an Arcadia book on the city of Portage which claims that the incorporated town of Ogden Dunes has never existed and is simply a part of the city of Portage. There are dozens, if not hundreds (depending on how you count them), more errors in that book, published several years ago by a supposedly reputable publisher, let alone dozens more more minor errors in other "historical" books published about Porter County. That doesn't prove those errors are true. It shows (to me, although admittedly to few others) that errors can be found all over the place. I suspect (though am not willing to invest the time & effort in proving) that, if I questioned each town board member and town employee of Pines, some would claim the name of their town is simply Pines while others would, having heard the same misinformation as everyone else and accepted it, claim that they live in the town of Town of Pines (and I suspect that they're even several who have never given the matter any thought at all and maybe even one who couldn't comprehend that the two versions of the name are even different). Does that prove that both answers are true? If the US Census Bur claimed that the tallest building in Edon, Ohio, is the post office, would you simply accept that?IanHistor (talk) 23:30, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Various sources have been provided to show that the official name is "Town of Pines"; the Topoquest map also shows it that way. Granted, there are errors in census data, USGS data, Google Maps data, et cetera -- I've seen them before.  And granted, errors can start small and propagate all over the place.  Nevertheless, federal sources like the census and the USGS are deemed to be fairly reliable generally and are commonly used as Wikipedia sources, even knowing they are not infallible, and so far we have seen no definitive source that disagrees in this case.  I'm not sure that your righteous anger about this issue is appropriate here; certainly calling people liars isn't helpful, as we're to assume good faith.  You say it's wrong; perhaps it is.  Please prove it, for Wikipedia's sake.  Omnedon (talk) 14:10, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

That's what this is all about. Wikipedia is not meant to be an accurate encyclopedia but rather it is meant to be the place for everyone to look to for information about everything as one great big, happy family. "are deemed to be fairly reliable generally and are commonly used as Wikipedia sources" "we have seen no definitive source that disagrees in this case" I do not understand these concepts. I take it we do all agree that there is one true answer to this question. Ok. There are only two places directly responsible for that name--the Porter County government (which granted it) and the town's own government (which chose it). If Wikipedia is interested in the matter, why wouldn't one of the decision-makers contact either and then dig into it until one or the other gives a moderator the answer? Nothing I can provide myself would prove it any more than my offering up published mentions of "Pines" proves anything. I would happily give up and simply ignore Wikipedia but I'm afraid that I'm constantly met with people interested in various of my hobby interests who rely on Wikipedia for info and are shocked when I suggest that not everything on Wikipedia is reliable and should be checked for accuracy. I'm doomed to pay attention to Wikipedia and its policies. I reassure myself, that I'm not simply ignoring ignorance and questionable logic, by my periodically correcting various little details (on regular pages rather than talk pages) but 90% of those corrections are removed and replaced by the original myths that people have heard and don't wish corrected. That's ok for the people who look through the history of each Wiki-page and see what details people have inserted over the years, before removal, but I know that few people go to that trouble, rather than the much simpler visiting of the main pages and that's that. I'm afraid this situation is like the historians and the reporters and the authors who occasionally look to me for info. These matters are fun for me up to the a point but I'm afraid I'm far too lazy to do enough Wiki-work to Wiki-prove the answers to questions such as this one. So I've simply gone on record here. Heck, nobody from the town itself has ever joined in the question, either here on Wiki or in the many other places which contradict each other, as to what is the real name of their town. As they apparently don't care at all, I suggest you start calling it one big woods, known as Pines, and drop the idea of it being a municipality entirely. I also enjoy maps. I once shared one with a foreign author for an interesting-sounding book project of his. That's about my limit however.IanHistor (talk) 23:30, 11 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Ian, you believe that the town is officially named "Pines" and not "Town of Pines", and you are complaining bitterly and sarcastically about this article's use of the latter, as well as about Wikipedia generally. Please refer to Verifiability and consider doing the research you mentioned, so that you can find a reliable source which you can cite and, on that basis, change the name of the article.  As an editor, you are a decision-maker and are empowered to do this yourself, as we all are.  Otherwise, please stop complaining; multiple sources support the current title and no sources have yet been cited that refute this. Omnedon (talk) 23:52, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
 * First of all, Ian, please try to be civil. Everyone is more likely to take you seriously and listen to your points if you don't call people liars and repeatedly insult Wikipedia, and your comments have been getting out of hand. And to everyone else involved in this discussion, I did some research, and the town may actually be known as Pines. The EPA (an official government source, for what it's worth) refers to the town as just Pines here, as do area news pieces here, here, and here. I also saw it called "The Pines" here and here, though neither of those two are really reliable sources. This isn't enough for an immediate pagemove, but it's worth thinking about. TheCatalyst31 Reaction•Creation 23:59, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, I also have found the town referred to as "Pines" and "The Pines" and "Town of Pines" on various websites. Even on the Porter County website one can find various versions of the name used in meeting minutes, et cetera; unfortunately the county site doesn't seem to have a definitive list of settlements or an official labeled county map, though perhaps I missed them.  Omnedon (talk) 00:19, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I had the same problem: the closest thing to an official map I could find was a blurry GPS network map which refers to the town as Pines, but that's hardly authoritative. I tried to find some official surveys here but didn't know what section or township code to search for; if you can figure that out, by all means look at that. Unless we find anything more conclusive, we should probably stick with Town of Pines for now. TheCatalyst31 Reaction•Creation 01:41, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Town of Pines is mostly in Section 2, Township 37 (North), Range 5 (West). Unfortunately not much useful documentation for that section.  Huwmanbeing  &#9728;  &#9733;  23:10, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

"Everyone is more likely to take you seriously and listen to your points if you don't call people liars and repeatedly insult Wikipedia" On the contrary, the only reason I am being noticed here is because of these actions instead of my simply correcting an error, which is then usually simply replaced by the original error-maker, without the matter even being taken notice of by anyone else. "I also saw it called 'The Pines'" Yes, I guess I should be happy that none of you Wikipedians do live in this area or you'd be claiming that Dune Acres' official name is D.A., Valparaiso's is Valpo, and Ogden Dunes' is The Dunes, due to those municipalities often being called those things by locals--even in published materials. "please try to be civil." Surely you jest. You, Catalyst, had never before taken any interest in the incorporated town of Duneland Beach, Indiana, until you expended the effort to search and find that I'd also corrected an error concerning it yesterday and so reverted Wiki's references to Duneland Beach back to their original, incorrect status, apparently to punish that meanie IanHistor. How can this be taken as anything but vandalism? "by the looks of it, it's still unincorporated" Yow, this is how Wikipedia is meant to work? I would make a lousy teacher. Воядт was a funny movie but it sure is frustrating e-meeting him.IanHistor (talk) 11:19, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

As you're interested in maps, Omnedon, I would even scan and post one (or a dozen) of my Porter County Surveyor's county maps showing Pines as Pines but I don't believe that would end this. What's worse, the last one lists Porter's name as "Town of Porter", and we know what my mentioning that would cause. Oh no!IanHistor (talk) 11:19, 12 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Ian, the name "Town of Pines" is used in several cited federal sources, but that's not the case with Porter or any of the others, nor does the USGS refer to Valparaiso as "Valpo". As has already been acknowledged, the situation with Town of Pines could be an anomaly, but you have yet to cite any sources that demonstrate this.  Be warned that if you continue to be insulting, you may run into problems here; if you want to discuss, that's welcome, but if you want to rant, you're in the wrong place.  Please read Civility. Omnedon (talk) 14:48, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Ian, please try to remain civil. I changed back Duneland Beach for the same reason I support keeping this at "Town of Pines", namely the lack of any reliable source; besides, that has nothing to do with Town of Pines or the discussion at hand. As Omnedon said, please read Civility, and Verifiability while you're at it. TheCatalyst31 Reaction•Creation 04:06, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * IanHistor: It's been a while since I've seen this much hysteria and sarcasm from an editor. If your goal is to try to persuade people to support your position, you have an odd way of going about it.  As to the name of the article, good articles depend on sources, and as the others have already pointed out, most official sources that WP relies on for this kind of thing say "Town of Pines".  If you have sources that say otherwise, that's good.  Cite them.  But please, if you can't or won't cite sources, don't expect to change things just by hectoring other contributors.  Huwmanbeing  &#9728;  &#9733;  13:12, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

The Indiana Association of CIties and Towns list gives the name as "Pines" on its list of city and town members (http://www.citiesandtowns.org/topic/subtopic.php?fDD=2-6). As a Michigan City native, I have almost always heard the place referred to as "the Town of Pines" (always with the article "the"). I conjecture that there are a couple of reasons: 1. Avoid confusion with Pine Township; 2. The single syllable name "Pines" doesn't really roll off the tongue. "Town of Pines" sounds better. JohnSiegmund (talk) 18:51, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Admittedly, it is nearly seven years since the last post to this discussion, but I work for the Census Bureau and will use our sources to investigate the true legal and official name. The town incorporated at some point in the 1950s and has been reported in Census Bureau censuses as "Town of Pines town" since 1960. We have conducted a generally annual Boundary and Annexatio Survey that is mailed to local officials to review since 1972 and no town authority has ever reported the name as incorrect. The Census Bureau also submits a list of incorporated municipalities to both the county government for their review and to the State of Indiana for their certification. Again, the name and legal description, "Town of Pines town," has been affirmed all these years. The Census Bureau is an agency that collects and reports data and not one that assigns legal names; the Census Bureau is only as good as the authoritative state and local sources on which it relies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.96.148.133 (talk) 13:13, 23 January 2017 (UTC)