Talk:Moultonborough, New Hampshire

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: New Hampshire Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	New Hampshire portal This article is supported by WikiProject New Hampshire (assessed as Mid-importance).

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Moultonborough, New Hampshire. 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://archive.is/20160602200744/http://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2015/SUB-EST2015.html to https://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2015/SUB-EST2015.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) 15:35, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New edits

Additions of details to this article are welcome, but they need to be much more specific. I will not revert for the time being, but any new edits have to be properly cited and contain much more detail; otherwise they will be removed, regardless of the worthiness that you ascribe to them. Please be aware of the three-revert rule. --Ken Gallager (talk) 15:55, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are not the dictator of what goes on this page. I do not have the time to pull out the book I read in high school from the public library and cite it. Nonetheless, the information is accurate. If you would like to emphasize the lack of source, put “source needed.” Otherwise, I will continue to revert these edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jacobgwiki (talk • contribs) 16:03, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but we can't simply take your word as to the accuracy of your edits. Like I said on your talk page, you really must read the page on WP:Verifiability. In a nutshell, The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material. It's not a matter of one person being a dictator and controlling what goes on this page. Any other experienced Wikipedia editor seeing your edits would request the same thing. Back up your personal observations with references so others can verify your statements. --Ken Gallager (talk) 18:59, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]