Talk:Dover, Vermont

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

United States: Vermont Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Vermont portal This article is supported by WikiProject Vermont (assessed as Low-importance).

Incidents?

I've removed the Incidents section: WP isn't news, and is this really a major historical event in the hundreds of years of Dover's existence? Nyttend (talk) 13:22, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. For Dover, this was. Made news all over the place. Police are not "related" as they are elsewhere. Yet they had to call on police from all over to help sort out.

This was originally in Randolph township NJ article and reverted. I reverted it back then realized that the article (if not the town itself) was not responsible for what people do elsewhere. Seems like it ought to be somewhere. I've never seen anything like this in a rural area before of that magnitude.Student7 (talk) 13:29, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This was maybe 8% (?) of the population of the town. I'm sure when the police drove up they weren't sure they weren't all locals. Get 8% of Boston's population out on the common drunk and see if that doesn't make headlines! :) Student7 (talk) 13:32, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One problem I have (not that I think it's wrong if this information were included :-) is that this has gotten very little press coverage. Searching 'dover vermont' (no quotes, just the words) in Google News revealed just two articles about it, both from New Jersey: no Vermont coverage at all. Or is it that it has gotten local coverage that's not listed on Google News? You're the Vermont resident, so you have a better chance at finding local information than me, who has only once visited the state, and that only in the north. I guess my main point is this: if this gets no local coverage, is it really that important? Nyttend (talk) 13:58, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Dover, Vermont. 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) 09:57, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]