Talk:Glen Rock, New Jersey

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Race and ethnicity in the United States census#Race|other races]] Anchor Race and ethnicity in the United States census#Race links to a specific web page: Race (human categorization). The anchor (#Race) has been deleted.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Glen Rock, New Jersey. 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:46, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Glen Rock, New Jersey. 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 archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150518090447/http://www.cgs.rutgers.edu/sites/ce-drupal02.rutgers.edu.cgs/files/documents/resource_center/rc_munichart_formsgovt_2011.pdf to http://www.cgs.rutgers.edu/sites/ce-drupal02.rutgers.edu.cgs/files/documents/resource_center/rc_munichart_formsgovt_2011.pdf#page=6

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) 16:17, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Glen Rock, New Jersey. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070304051135/http://www.jimmyvivino.com/bio.html to http://www.jimmyvivino.com/bio.html

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) 11:20, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Maps in infobox

The number of maps currently in the infobox is simply excessive. I had removed the Census Bureau map, the Bergen County pin map, and the New Jersey pin map before it was reverted by @Alansohn. My reasoning for doing so is as follows:

The top map is not only aesthetically pleasing, but it places the location of the town within both the County and the state. It is also commonplace in municipalities across the country. This marks the county pin map and the state pin map redundant. For an in-depth look for the streets of the town, the interactive map allows the user to determine the exact level of specificity they want to look at, while the census map only allows a limited amount of street names to be listed due to its size. The pin map of the US places the location of the town within the country, and no other maps serve this purpose.

More maps is not necessarily a problem, but including multiple maps that fulfill the same purpose (some better than others) can allow the reader to be overwhelmed. Additionally, it clogs up the article; the infobox currently stretches all the way down to the 2000 census subheading. To be honest, 3 different maps still seems a little bit too much, as most municipalities in other states only have one or two, but I was just getting rid of the maps that served the same purposes as other maps but worse.

What are your thoughts, @Alansohn? ~BappleBusiness^[talk] 07:07, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging you again @Alansohn in case you missed it. ~BappleBusiness^[talk] 15:40, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

- BappleBusiness, thanks for reaching out again. I'm catching up and going through these articles to see the best way to provide adequate context on location using maps, without overwhelming readers. I'll try to respond more completely over the next few days. Alansohn (talk) 14:02, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  In case you forgot, I'm pinging you again @Alansohn. ~BappleBusiness^[talk] 23:22, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - You keep reverting my edits without discussing in the talk page Alansohn. I have given you many chances, please at least make an effort to have a discussion like you said you would on September 12. ~BappleBusiness^[talk] 14:49, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Alansohn, I don't know why you want to add these maps back, since you have not explained in the talk page. The maps you are adding serve the same purpose as other maps and simply make the infobox longer and the article more cumbersome. Most articles that I can find on locations have either one or two types of maps (see Newark, New Jersey; Syracuse, New York; Springfield, Massachusetts; Tegucigalpa -- they have varied maps included). Three, like you keep adding in this article and others, is excessive and not consistent. Different maps may have slightly different benefits, but keeping all of them defeats the purpose of Wikipedia being an encyclopedia rather than a repository.
    
    Up above in previous comments, I explained why I am choosing to keep the specific maps that I am. We can talk about specifics, but you surely can concede that three types of maps is too much. Please discuss in the talk page if you want to explain your objections. BappleBusiness^[talk] 05:13, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Alansohn, I will explain why I am keeping the maps I am. These maps provide detail at the local, county, state, and country level. They are interactable and condensed by default, so the infobox doesn't stretch obscenely low like it is now. This set-up is used in other articles, such as Syracuse, New York and Springfield, Massachusetts. I would be open to other configurations, but you have refused to engage with me on the talk page. BappleBusiness^[talk] 02:23, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]