Talk:Folsom, New Mexico

United States: New Mexico 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.
	New Mexico portal This article is supported by WikiProject New Mexico (assessed as Low-importance).

Cities

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

It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.

Wikipedians in New Mexico may be able to help!

The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Folsom, New Mexico. 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 {{dead link}} tag to http://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2015/SUB-EST2015.html
Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6YSasqtfX?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.census.gov%2Fprod%2Fwww%2Fdecennial.html to http://www.census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130911234518/http://factfinder2.census.gov to http://factfinder2.census.gov

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) 10:26, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sally Rooke

There has been an edit war over the inclusion of Sally Rooke in the list of notable persons. Having reviewed the matter from an uninvolved perspective, I believe inclusion is appropriate. Rooke is deceased so that BLP1E has no application, and she appears to be sufficiently notable to be included here. Indeed, a review of source material easily retrieved with a google search shows that her actions during the great flood were so noteworthy that the State of New Mexico has designated her as a one of the "Heroines of New Mexico", and a monument was erected next to the Folsom Museum in her honor. Cbl62 (talk) 14:09, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As for WP:WTAF (which is an "essay" not a policy or guideline), it is concerned with creating unwarranted red-links. There is no red-linking here, and so WTAF appears to have no application whatsoever. Cbl62 (talk) 14:14, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As for WP:BLP1E, it discusses Biographies of Living Persons, and this person died over 100 years ago, so that argument would seem to be irrelevant as well.Jacona (talk) 16:23, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]