Wikipedia

Talk:Waltham, Massachusetts

Latest comment: 4 years ago by Robert Rossi in topic Top employers
Learn more about this page

History

edit
Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

It seems there's a lot of interesting history having to do with the city's role in the Industrial Revolution, the history of the city's economy, etc. -- Beland 03:40, 10 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Birthplace of Ind. Rev

edit
Latest comment: 13 years ago9 comments3 people in discussion

The birthplace of the Industrial Revolution was Beverly, MA, due to the first cotton mill in America (1787) being finished and under production there. See Beverly Cotton Manufactory Silivrenion (talk) 12:42, 15 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

  • And by some accounts the birthplace of the American Industrial Revolution was the Blackstone River Valley. There seems to be a sizable contingent of folks arguing that the birthplace of the American Industrial Revolution was Pawtucket, Rhode Island. The "birthplace of the American Industrial Revolution" isn't really something that can be pinned down to a particular town in a verifiable way. But you were right to revert that edit. :-) Tim Pierce (talk) 14:37, 16 September 2010 (UTC)Reply
The arguing accounts are actually part of history. The BCM didn't want to share their trade secrets, and angered Moses Brown of Providence. Enough of the workers from the BCM were bribed to work with Slater in Pawtucket that they were able to improve on the BCM's designs. Anyway, there's always been a historical argument about the first cotton mill. The conflicting information dates way back to the 1800's, however there's a sizable amount of evidence showing BCM was the first. "Birthplace" is kind of a vague thing that can't be pinned down, but if you look at the first automated industry in America, the BCM was, in all known history, the earliest to create and use automated machines to perform mechanical tasks. Silivrenion (talk) 14:42, 18 September 2010 (UTC)Reply
That's really the point: "birthplace" is just too vague and subjective a term to use as an absolute descriptor in Wikipedia, and there doesn't seem to be a consensus that the birthplace of the American Industrial Revolution was Waltham or Beverly or Pawtucket or any other single town. Tim Pierce (talk) 18:46, 18 September 2010 (UTC)Reply
Well Tim, that's why we say 'billed as' and add a reference to who by. It's unarguable that many people consider Waltham to be the birthplace, which is unarguably notable. I could debate the merit of the calim, but that misses the entire point. Just because you disagree with the claim doesn't mean it cant be mentioned, as a claim, with links to the page for the industrial revolution. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.115.65.29 (talk) 19:07, 25 April 2011 (UTC)Reply
I think actually it is arguable. I don't think that you'll find a large number of scholars who agree that Waltham is the single and only birthplace of the American Industrial Revolution. I think you would find a strong consensus from historians that Waltham played a significant role, but also a strong consensus that no one city gets that label all by itself. I could be wrong, of course, and you're welcome to find sources to prove me wrong, but they'll have to be better sources for American history than a Derbyshire lathe manufacturer. —Tim Pierce (talk) 20:03, 25 April 2011 (UTC)Reply
You're missing the entire point- that some people make the claim. That is not arguable. The veracity of the claim itself might be arguable, but that fact that claim has been made isn't. If a line mentions that some historians or locals make the claim, then links to a page in which the claim is made, it should stay if it properly worded. It's notable that the claim is made. It's a simple concept. If Roger Ebert is on record calling a movie the best of a decade, it's notable that he made the claim. It shouldn't be deleted because you don't agree with it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.115.65.29 (talk) 22:07, 25 April 2011 (UTC)Reply
I think the principle of due weight compels us to take the relative merits of differing opinions into account. —Tim Pierce (talk) 02:19, 26 April 2011 (UTC)Reply


Everybody- Tim Pierce is now editing my responses on this page to his arguments. Are you serious Tim? And due weight? Are you a thought policeman? There are clear hyperlinks to pages on the industrial revolution, as well as references. It's not up to you to delete other people's claims simply because you don't agree with them. That is not in the spirit of wikipedia. If the wording is proper, you have no basis whatsoever to delete the claims. Its unequivocal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.115.65.29 (talk) 03:33, 26 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

John A. Bailey

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago7 comments2 people in discussion

This entry keeps getting re-added to the list of "Notable residents":

I don't think this individual counts as a "notable resident" of Waltham; he does not appear to be sufficiently notable for his own article in the encyclopedia, which sets him apart from every other person in the "Notable residents" section. I am interested in hearing other opinions. —Tim Pierce (talk) 08:35, 21 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

My reading of Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/US Guideline#Notable people and Wikipedia:NLIST#Lists of people lead me to conclude that WP:NOTABILITY should apply to members of this list as well as to standalone articles, so I am removing John A. Bailey from the list. —Tim Pierce (talk) 22:17, 21 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
Response: We have read the guidelines and see no references stating a notable resident must have a dedicated wiki page. Looking at notable residents in other towns and cities confirms this. Please look into the history and you will see this resident has been part of the Waltham page for many years and was approved by other admins and editors. John A. Bailey is the inventor of the drink through coffee lid. This invention was designed and developed in Waltham, MA, this is clearly stated on the US Patent. In addition this invention is still used today by millions of people around the globe, chances are if you bought a coffee this morning you used his lid. He is a Waltham native who is very well known in the plastics industry as a vacuum forming pioneer. Please explain your definition of “sufficiently notable”. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.216.17.235 (talk) 17:47, 22 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
From Wikipedia:NLIST:
Inclusion in lists contained within articles should be determined by WP:Source list, in that the entries must have the same importance to the subject as would be required for the entry to be included in the text of the article according to Wikipedia policies and guidelines (including WP:Trivia sections). Furthermore, every entry in any such list requires a reliable source attesting to the fact that the named person is a member of the listed group.
This is an ongoing problem with all Wikipedia geographic articles, not just this one. The "Notable residents" section of any Wikipedia article has a tendency to explode into a long list of people with very questionable claims to notability, which is probably what you've seen on the other Wikipedia articles you mention. Holding a U.S. patent doesn't automatically confer notability. I think this is an appropriate place to draw the line. —Tim Pierce (talk) 19:07, 22 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
The U.S. patent establishes Wikipedia's reliable source criteria. You failed to define your definition of sufficiently notable. Also please explain why a federal document recognized around the world does not confer notability that the resident lived in Waltham and completed the stated claim. We have reviewed all of the guidelines so I await your response before the next action is taken. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.216.17.235 (talk) 19:42, 23 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
The metric for "sufficiently notable" in this case is "that the entries must have the same importance to the subject as would be required for the entry to be included in the text of the article according to Wikipedia policies and guidelines." If John A. Bailey is sufficiently significant that it would make sense to have a section in the article that's about him, then it makes sense to include him under "notable residents". The usual rule of thumb here is that if someone isn't notable enough to write a Wikipedia article about them, they're not "notable" enough to appear in a list of "notable residents." There are exceptions to this rule, but they're rare; when an article on Wikipedia doesn't follow this pattern, it's usually an error and should be corrected.
Let me take this from another direction. I would prefer not to remove John Bailey from the list of notable residents. I'd prefer to find documentation about his work that satisfies Wikipedia's notability criteria. That requires more documentation than just the patent -- for example, a newspaper or journal article about John Bailey and his contributions to the beverage industry. I couldn't find anything like that when I searched earlier; can you help me find it? If so, we can both be satisfied. Thanks. —Tim Pierce (talk) 21:20, 23 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Response: We are in the process of compiling a biography and references for a Wikipedia page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.216.17.235 (talk) 22:34, 23 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Waltham, Massachusetts. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:48, 28 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Waltham, Massachusetts. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

 Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:42, 2 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Corrected URL to "dining" to find the reference to Restaurant Row. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 13:22, 2 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Timeline of Waltham, Massachusetts

edit
edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Waltham, Massachusetts. 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) 19:52, 14 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Waltham, Massachusetts. 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) 11:29, 6 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Native American/Indigenous people's history in Waltham area?

edit
Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi All,

Would be great if some experts were willing to start building out a section for this page on pre-European settlement history in what is now the Waltham-region. From what little I know, at least four Native American communities are known to have been in the region. In general, the pre-official municipal founding date history seems missing--is this not the right page for such information? Ggrattan (talk) 16:51, 29 November 2019 (UTC)Reply

Top employers

edit
Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The table of top employers in Waltham, while faithfully reproducing that in the cited source, seems to me highly suspect. At a very minimum, it is only counting city residents, or people actually employed in the city, by the employers listed. Otherwise PerkinElmer and Thermo Scientific should certainly be on that list, I think?!? They are large companies with their HQs in Waltham.Robert Rossi (talk) 15:05, 23 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Waltham,_Massachusetts&oldid=1212336186"