Talk:Hanover, New Hampshire

message: :"Norwich and Hanover share one of the only inter-state school districts in the nation."
Presumably this should be either 
"Norwich and Hanover share the only inter-state school district in the nation." or 
"Norwich and Hanover share one of the few inter-state school districts in the nation."
But I don't know which.
—wwoods 21:47, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: There is at least one other; Rivendell Interstate School District (Serving the towns of Orford, NH and Vershire, Fairlee, and West Fairlee, VT), but I did not find any others.  I also found a Vermont legal code (§792) about setting them up with New York, but I could not find an example of it being used. Seems to me to be an artifact left over from the towns that wanted to be part of Vermont but were retained by New York and New Hampshire. —MJBurrage(T•C) 20:04, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

text: Just found a bit more.  Dresden was the first and—according to Dresden School District (version 182232782)—only Interstate School District, until Rivendell was formed in 1998. —MJBurrage(T•C) 20:22, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Also the Delmar School District between Delaware and Maryland. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wkharrisjr (talk • contribs) 01:21, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Inter-state school district

message: I saw that Mia Tyler was added to the inhabitants list.  Did she ever actually live in Hanover?  I mean, if we're going with people who were simply born at the hospital, then add Liv Tyler too.  
Amber388 02:14, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Inhabitants

message: Hanover Center should have its own entry. Amber388 02:31, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Hanover Center

message: Please see the WikiProject New Hampshire talk page for background on the proposed merge of the Hanover CDP article with this article.--Ken Gallager (talk) 13:53, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge discussion 

message: Theodore Geisel(Dr.Suess) went to Dartmouth
We should consider adding him to important people.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.220.242.162 (talk) 15:24, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Notable People

message: This information is trivial and not appropriate for an encyclopedia. It information that would only be of interest to bsite. I have rema resident and better found in a Chamber of Commerce removed this section.Wkharrisjr (talk) 01:24, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It may have been worded inappropriately emphasizing a utility in a WP:PR or WP:SPAM manner, but utilities are part of infrastructure and should be in article. (didn't quite understand the "I have rema resident" phrase). Student7 (talk) 11:26, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I gave it a crack. I think I rm most spam-like stuff, but still think you have to name phone companies. Certainly don't have to identify broadband suppliers by name. Having a municipally owned, along with the college, water company is different IMO. Maybe needs a sentence under government. The whole section helps to define HANOVER IMO.Student7 (talk) 11:51, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I will wait to see the general reaction before reworking the Littleton section which had the same objections. Student7 (talk) 11:54, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: What I meant to say, and royally screwed up on this sticky keyboard, is that information about utilities might be of interest to a resident, but is not really relevent in a encyclopedia. This is the type of information one would go to the local Chamber of Commerce if you really needed. I think a listing like this would fall under  [] and/or [].Wkharrisjr (talk) 21:24, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Like I said in my last edit summary (before looking at the discussion here), infrastructure would be encyclopedic if given with sufficient detail, so thanks, Student7, for providing that with the water company.  Bare lists should just be avoided.--Ken Gallager (talk) 12:47, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I see your point. Took up too much white space for no good reason. Also, the information conveyed wasn't as high quality as I had thought. This is "forced out" when an editor has to discuss it (and footnote it!) rather than merely list it!   :)   Student7 (talk) 12:47, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  I also concur- the present format of prose instead of lists of facts both looks better and provides more encyclopedic information.Wkharrisjr (talk) 16:50, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Utilities information

message: I am not anti-business, but I have routinely been cutting out c-of-c links from almost all place articles because of their bias in favor of local business and often WP:EL as well. One was just permitted in this article. I was wondering why. Student7 (talk) 03:10, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, the link was added by a user back in July 2011, along with two links to other pages on the same website.  I think it's okay to have one link to a local chamber of commerce, and they're actually fairly common in the communities that I've looked at around the nation.  A single link to a chamber of commerce basically consolidates the business tendencies into one place.  --Ken Gallager (talk) 08:36, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: C of C link

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Hanover, 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://web.archive.org/web/20100528152115/http://www.hanovernh.org/about to http://www.hanovernh.org/about
*Added archive https://archive.is/20160602200744/http://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2015/SUB-EST2015.html to http://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.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:04, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Lede needs a complete rewrite. The current lede is promotional and doesn't provide an actual overview of the rest of the article. Kevin (aka L235 ·  t ·  c) 14:13, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I am working on a new lede. -stevejsmith8  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevejsmith8 (talk • contribs) 16:27, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lede 

message: I have removed the claim that For a time, Dresden was capital of the republic because there is nothing about it in Vermont Republic and the offered reference actually says (p. 45 and 46):
 Having remade the boundary between Vermont and New Hampshire, the College Party began to visualize a whole new state carved out of both sides of the Connecticut Valley with Dresden, as the College district of Hanover was now called, the center and capital.
So they were just imagining it and working on Dresden becoming a capital. But later text on p. 49:
 When the Green Mountain Republic had expelled the sixteen New Hampshire towns in 1799, thus dashing the College Party's hopes for an independent state in the Connecticut Valley with the College district (Dresden) as the capital…
makes it clear their project for making Dresden a capital has not succeeded. --16:40, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dresden as a capital