Wikipedia

Talk:Janesville, Wisconsin

Latest comment: 2 months ago by M2545 in topic Mayors/managers
Learn more about this page

City of Janesville Flag

edit
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
File:City of Janesville Flag.png
The City of Janesville Flag

The City flag was adopted on March 23, 2015 by the City of Janesville Common Council. The flag design was created by holding a contest among Janesville’s students by the City of Janesville and the School District of Janesville. Craig High School Senior Maggie Gorman created the winning flag design. The new City flag was publicly presented and first raised in front of City Hall during a ceremony held on June 15, 2015.

Janesville’s city flag is a symbol combining the different generations of Janesville’s community: The past, the present and the future. The City of Janesville was incorporated in the year 1853. The four stars represent the original four wards of the city. The green color stands for the farm fields which provided a foundation for a healthy and prosperous agricultural industry. The black color represents the rich soil for which the Janesville region is famous along with the heavy smoke that billowed from the city smoke stacks as it industrialized into a manufacturing economy. The center section of the flag (the “squiggly tree”), is the City of Janesville’s logo. This logo symbolizes Janesville’s identity as “Wisconsin’s Park Place.” Finally, the circle represents the unity of Janesville, a community that is unified in working together for a better future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eppena (talk • contribs) 20:38, 17 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Sister City

edit

It would appear that Janesville has a sister city; Leon, Nicaragua. See http://www.legis.state.wi.us/lrb/pubs/wb/98wb5.pdf

Hanging Tree

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Lynch mob hangs convicted murderer (convicted in 1859) and prompts ban on capital punishment? I'm sorry, this is wrong for a number of reasons, least of which is that capital punishment was abolished in Wisconsin around the year 1852 after the botched John McCaffary hanging in Kenosha. So, because of this ,by the time David Mayberry was grabbed by a lynch mob and hung, capital punishment had already been abolished for 7 years or so. Deleted bit about a 1859 incident having an impact on enacting a 1852 law. In fact, because the tree no longer stands (see ref) I fail to see what is news worthy about some long gone tree at all.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.175.200.241 (talk) 20:43, 4 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

Geraldo Trivia

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion

If I remember correctly, the Geraldo incident and the cross burning in Peace Park (then simply a part of Rockport Park) happened as two separate events. Can anyone else confirm this? Steve p 18:13, 9 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Nevermind, the Geraldo filmed cross burning did not occur in Rockport Park because the pool was still open for the season and was not allowed at that time. Earlier in the late May/early June of 1992, the same groups did have a cross burning in Rockport on the site of what now is Peace Park. Steve p 01:19, 11 June 2006 (UTC)Reply
Officially, it's still part of Rockport Park. [1] As to whether there were one or two cross burnings and where they were, I'll need to spend some time at the library. --Dhartung | Talk 03:23, 11 June 2006 (UTC)Reply
Come to think about it, there may have been two at Rockport, but I'm certain the one Geraldo filmed was at the organizers home. Steve p 12:38, 11 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

I hardly consider Geraldo desperately trying to get ratings as a "historical event" that belongs here.Bfitz99 (talk) 15:16, 3 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

Janesville Cow

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Does anyone know where the cow will be moving to? and when? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Agilitynut (talk • contribs).

The cow stays with the property. It was considered at one point for the center of the roundabout (SE corner of the new Menard's) but the city ruled that out for safety reasons (truck movement, visibility, etc.) and it will be nearby instead. --Dhartung | Talk 18:53, 19 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

My Dad had that cow installed at the Janesville Oasis in 1965. Did you know at that time that the Oasis neon sign was the largest neon sign in the world?Bfitz99 (talk) 15:20, 3 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

National Register of Historic Places

edit
Latest comment: 4 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

After researching the claim that 20% of the states registered historic places were in Janesville I found that Janesville has fewer than Beloit and less the 1/5 of Madison. Therefor, the city does not have 20% and I took down this claim. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.196.142.72 (talk • contribs).

Did you research only NRHP individual properties, or did you count contributing structures in all historic districts? That's what the claim is. It was true at one point, and I'd be interested in seeing the figures today. --Dhartung | Talk 18:25, 19 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

According to the National Park Service, Janesville and Beloit each have 34 registered *resource names*. http://www.nr.nps.gov/nrloc1.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.76.152.216 (talk) 08:08, 9 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

I removed this claim. Even taking into account that there are several large districts in Janesville with many contributing structures, the same holds true for numerous other multi-structure districts across the state. When you take the total number of statewide contributing structures included within each place entry and then subtract anything that is not a structure, this is still more than 5x the contributing structures from Janesville. Wantonlife (talk) 22:14, 2 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

Population

edit
Latest comment: 17 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Does anyone have a citation that can confirm the population stats added by the user 70.226.144.223? It looks like that figure is for all of Rock County, and it seems a bit misleading to call the entire county the Janesville metropolitan area?[2] Also, a citation for the "fastest-growing" claim would be appreciated. --WeisheitSuchen 17:04, 28 July 2007 (UTC)Reply 

 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.150.248.224 (talk) 15:24, 20 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

ePodunk fact

edit
Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I noticed that someone doesn't like this fact. I was wondering why? I added it because it's not the first time (I'm pretty sure) Janesville was voted as a "best home town", and I just wanted to illustrate this fact. 132.61.176.6 20:19, 5 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

- If I wanted to illustrate this fact, I'd just insert a photo of Danielle Houghton. :P — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.193.177.161 (talk) 02:32, 6 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

Religion Section

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Anybody know of an actual reason to delete this section? The information seems noteworthy to me, but it's been deleted a couple of times. I'm also moving the info about Miracle back to the religion section instead of trivia. WeisheitSuchen 01:24, 10 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Merger proposal: town and city of Janesville, Wisconsin articles

edit
Latest comment: 11 years ago11 comments9 people in discussion
The consensus in this discussion is to not merge. Northamerica1000(talk) 19:43, 26 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I oppose the merger of the town and city of Janesville in one article. Both have separate governments. The proposed merger would make the article inaccurate. I expres my concerns when the merger proposal of the Town of Madison&City of Madison. Both articles should be kept separate: they are 2 different local government bodies. Thank you- RFD (talk) 14:53, 9 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

I agree with RFD--the two articles should be kept separate. Is it possible this merger tag was added by someone who doesn't realize that these are two different places with separate local governments? WeisheitSuchen (talk) 15:49, 9 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
The basic local government units in Wisconsin are:Towns,Cities,&Villages and they are independent, separate from each other. Thank you-RFD (talk) 16:12, 9 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
Strong objection. They are politically independent entities. Their only simularity is the word "Janesville". There are literally hundreds of cities and townships in Wisconsin with the same name that are completely separate. Royalbroil 17:42, 9 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
Strong object also: I agree with the above statements; the two articles are about two different topics with similar names. —Salmar (talk) 19:08, 9 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
'Strong object - nomination betrays failure to understand Wisconsin local government. --Orange Mike | Talk 06:41, 10 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
Strong object - these are easily confused things, yet distinct. These are the strongest set of criteria for keeping them seperate. Merenta (talk) 17:27, 10 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
Agree - And we should also merge Milwaukee County and Milwaukee while we're at it. They're virtually interchangeable. -Freekee (talk) 05:13, 12 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
Strong object I saw this and thought "What??!!" I'm not the most familiar with Wisconsin local government, but I know enough that this is a horrid idea. Good point by Freekee — assuming s/he isn't serious — about such a thing being a bad idea. Nyttend (talk) 16:11, 20 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
OK, I think everyone agrees that this is a bad idea. With such a strong consensus, I'm going to be bold and remove the merger proposal template. Thanks for putting in your votes everyone!WeisheitSuchen (talk) 17:20, 20 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Merger proposal

edit
Latest comment: 11 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
The result of this discussion is no consensus to merge. Northamerica1000(talk) 19:44, 26 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Oakhill Christian School is a tiny school with no evidence of notability. It should be merged with this article, in the Education section. -- Mesconsing (talk) 15:34, 29 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Oppose As a high school (and also a primary school), it meets WP:HIGHSCHOOL. Boleyn (talk) 16:36, 1 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Janesville, Wisconsin. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:20, 9 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Janesville, Wisconsin. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:33, 19 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Janesville, Wisconsin. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:26, 24 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

From 128Sugarloaf: Hello fellow Wikepedians,


I would like to add the following information to the Janesville, WI website.

As of 2015, the median household income was $49,001. [32] Per capita income in past 12 months (in 2015 dollars), 2011-2015 was $25,461.[33] Percentage of people living in poverty 2011-2015 was 15.2%. [34]

My source for each of these facts is census.gov.

I've carefully checked the wiki pages for the following towns in Wisconsin. All of them have median family income, per capita income and poverty rate located in demographics or under census:

Green Lake, Princeton, Ripon, Berlin, Markesan, Hurley, Iron River, Bayfield, Milwaukee, Oshkosh, Appleton, Plainfield, Rosendale, FondduLac;

None of these 14 cities and towns have "mean income". It is not a meaningful statistic and it is very misleading. I propose we keep the income stats to the ones listed in every Wisconsin town I've studied in Wikipedia:

that is, median family income, per capita income and poverty rate.

I've tried to use the census.gov site as the source for these additions. I've noted that a number of the towns listed above do not have any sources for those three income statistics, but we should have good sources for Janesville.

I am using the information from census.gov.

I think I am being fair here. I added the information and discussed it on my talk page, believing that my talk page was the talk page where I was supposed to suggest these changes. From now on, I will make any proposed changes on the Janesville article to this talk page first. Again, the info is standard statistics for cities and towns throughout the US- you can look at the wiki pages for the above 14 towns and cities above as proof. Note those towns have more detailed information in those three income statistics than I've been able to find for Janesville. Janesville should have these three statistics: median family income, per capita income and poverty rate. I am fine with putting them under demographics as they appear now, or economy, whichever people feel strongly about.

Let me know your thoughts.

128Sugarloaf 128Sugarloaf (talk) 21:27, 27 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Goldstein book

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Here to disagree with Magnolia677's removal of mention of the Goldstein book in the text. As it stands, we hardly cover the considerable impact of the closure of the General Motors plant, instead focusing on how it came to be there (in the History section as well as the Economy section) and what GM did afterwards. The impact of a major employer shutting down is an important part of the history of a place, and few places get a history by an accomplished reporter or historian, much less one that wins a big award. So I think it should be mentioned and would ask Magnolia677 to either revert or write it into History instead, where I would have more naturally put it. Yngvadottir (talk) 13:59, 14 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

The edit I removed said:
In 2017 Washington Post reporter Amy Goldstein's book about the impact of the closure of the General Motors plant on the city, Janesville: An American Story, won the Financial Times and McKinsey Business Book of the Year Award.
This edit contributes nothing to the article, because the article is about Janesville, not about Amy Goldstein and her book. If an editor would like to read the book, they would likely find something of value to add to this article (about the history and economy of the city). As it stands now the edit is merely a book plug, and a needless one at that, because the book is already mentioned in the "further reading" section of the article. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:27, 14 November 2017 (UTC)Reply
I believe it adds more relevant info than mentioning that GM later entirely abandoned manufacturing that class of vehicle, and that the article should say something about the impact of the plant closure on Janesville. It could also be argued that the article could use a section on media mentions - the book would fit well in such a section. Further reading is all very well, but the article omits what the book focuses on. Best, perhaps, to have a bit under History about the plant closure, but I still think the book should be mentioned there if no media mentions sections are added, rather than just cited. It's a big deal that the author selected this city to write about as her case study, and that it was honored as the best business book of the year. So I guess I disagree that it's irrelevant to the city. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:56, 14 November 2017 (UTC)Reply
edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Janesville, Wisconsin. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:06, 22 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

Mayors/managers

edit
Latest comment: 2 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

@M2545: If I was to make a separate page for a List of "mayors" of Janesville.. since Janesville is now run by a city manager, and has been for over 100 years, would we want to instead go with the article name "List of city managers of Janesville" and just include the pre-1923 mayors in a separate section on that list? -- Asdasdasdff (talk) 16:15, 16 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Asdasdasdff: Good idea! Maybe also create a redirect to the new article from "List of mayors of Janesville". -- M2545 (talk) 18:53, 16 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Janesville,_Wisconsin&oldid=1246152453"