Talk:Lititz, Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania Low‑importance

	Pennsylvania portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania 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.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

Wondering how to edit this City Entry?
WikiProject U.S. states might help.

With regards to the Borden case, is it relevent that Ludwig and Borden were homeschooled? This is the only article that seems to think so. 24.4.248.59 03:50, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in the area it was played up by the media a bit. I don't know if it's relevant or not--I think the thing it adds to the article is the fact that not many of the public school students in the area really knew either of them personally. authraw 14:30, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

People section

I tagged the bit about Craig McKaige. (1) No source given. (2) I cannot confirm the film credit. (3) Even if true, a bit part is not notability. (4) No Google hits, once Wikipedia and its mirrors are eliminated. Please provide a source. Robert A.West (Talk) 05:01, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Schools

Would it be relevant to list some of the private schools located in Lititz in the School section, such as Lindon Hall, and possibly the Lititz Watch Technicum?

~ UxP August 20, 2007 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.166.117.136 (talk) 06:02, August 20, 2007 (UTC)

Some folks have been editing recently to include Lititz Christian School. This raises a few questions for me that i think need to be discussed here before making any changes:

1) Since this article is about Lititz, and not Warwick School District, should only the Warwick schools located in Lititz be included? Currently, all WSD schools are listed, even those like John Beck, which lies and schools students exclusively from outside the Borough. 2) If all WSD schools are included, then what about the private schools located in Lititz? Currently, none are listed. Also, consider that contrary to WSD schools, private schools are free to pull students from lots of locations, not just Lititz. 3) If we list private schools, do we list those in the Borough only, or do we list all those in the 17543 zip code? 4) Whether we choose to include non-Borough schools in this article should also dictate our inclusion or exclusion of other non-Borough information, such as the Borden Murders, as a matter of consistency, no?TheBigZzz (talk) 01:48, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be inclined to say that the article could include anything with a Lititz mailing address. After all, many Manheim Twp residents have Lititz mailing addresses. Additionally, the Borden murders do seem to fall into this category (even though the Bordens may have been murdered outside of Lititz Boro, Ludwig lived with his parents within the boro). On a side note, though, I'm not entirely sure that two murders committed by one man going on four years ago even makes the event notable enough to warrant a WP article, let alone inclusion in the Lititz article.Athene cunicularia (talk) 04:14, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You've been on the deletion bandwagon regarding that for a while haven't you? :) It raises a good question though. At what point do the events of a place define that place? The Borden murders were national sensational news for an entire news cycle, and i am sure that when some people hear the name Lititz they immediately think of that story, even four years later. But what about the nincompoop who buzzed the White House the year before? Remember that? America doesn't, for the most part. He was from Lititz, 17543.

Everyone remembers Love Canal not for what a wonderful place it was to live but for the gross negligence by a company and a government in allowing contamination to cause illness. Same with Hinkley, CA, a town made famous by the sludge buried there by PG&E, and made infamous by the movie Erin Brockovich. Or what about Lockerbie, Scotland? Nobody had a clue it even existed until terrorists blew up an airplane overhead. And who could forget the events of Littleton, CO? Or Waco, TX?

I guess the question is what do we want our legacy to be? We have an opportunity to shape public perception of our place by choosing to include those things about Lititz we want everyone to know. Yes its true that history will show every edit and this discussion, but increasingly the media is turning to WP as a source of knowledge. A main article with stories about racism, minty water and murder might destroy the image of a quaint American town that many have worked hard to foster, just when we are looking for that image to bring us positive attention. (Well, minty water probably isn't so bad, is it?)
TheBigZzz (talk) 04:55, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see no reason the private schools shouldn't be included; the only reason I reverted them was because they were put under the school district. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 12:07, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let's be clear. I don't support the removal of content just because it "shapes the perception" in a negative way. Places like Love Canal are rightfully known for their disasters (and the good things like Superfund that came out of them). But mentioning one murderer doesn't really seem to have a whole lot of relevance in the grand scheme of things.Athene cunicularia (talk) 18:19, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lititz Water

Announcement of the group's effort was in the newspaper (see my citation). There is a section on Lititz water controversy in this article. Someone else already tried to add something about it. Seems notable to me. What's your reasoning for removing it?Athene cunicularia (talk) 16:50, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As I mentioned in my edit, there are thousands of websites set up all the time about causes, it's not worth noting. Imaslee pviking ( talk ) 19:53, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This one was noted by the local paper (which makes it notable) about a controversial matter that is listed in the page. I don't see how your reasoning applies.Athene cunicularia (talk) 20:05, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not only that, but the Intel article is dedicated entirely to the website's creation, it's not just passively mentioned. I don't know how you call that non-notable. I understand that in your opinion, the section is unnecessary. Do you have anything else to back up your claim?Athene cunicularia (talk) 20:14, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not saying the entire section's not-notable, it's just this website. Growing up in Lititz, I can say, who cares about the Intel. Look at any other wikipage and find me one that has such a specified and local website dedicated to one singular cause (other than basic town pages) that is relevant to the page. Newspapers do full articles on unimportant things all the timeImaslee pviking ( talk ) 01:51, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that your personal assessment of an article in a reliable newspaper (see WP:Notable) is relevant. This is, so far, your only rationale. The onus is on you to find some Wikipedia policy that would show me otherwise.

Clearly the issue is important to some Lititzians or else it wouldn't have a section here. Clearly the Intelligencer Journal knows this, or else it wouldn't have published an entire article dedicated to this group's website. Why are you advocating the removal of information that is relevant to the issue?
You say "who cares about The Intel?". Is it some small-time newspaper, or is it the major one for the area?
You also say "growing up in Lititz." Is it possible that you have a conflict of interest?
Since you admit that the section is notable, why wouldn't information collected from a reliable newspaper have some relevance; it's recent news on the issue, is it not?

You need more than your personal opinion to support your actions. "Who cares about the Intel," "newspapers do full articles on unimportant things all the time" aren't enough. I will revert your edit on 8/22 if you don't come up with some Wikipedia guideline to back up your reasoning. Otherwise, I will report you as potential Conflict of Interest.Athene cunicularia (talk) 03:33, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can't really report me as the conflict of interest since I know the area and am better to report on it, how else can you improve a town, city or region's wikipage? COIs only arise if I were some competing company arguing against it or some member of the Lititz council trying to cover it up, since I no long have any interests in Lititz there's no COI here. Having said that, other than another source of information, I think that no paragraph should be dedicated to the creation of a website, rather than the website itself. I don't see how that is irrational? As to "clearly it's important to Lititzians" you put it in, and you're the one defending it. It's clearly important to you but as to speaking for all of the people in Lititz or even a majority of them that's out of bounds. Who knows how many people are involved here. Who knows if there are even any people from Lititz involved. I say there are not that many involved since Lititzians tend to be more conservative and not this environmental (I have this knowledge since I grew up there and have familiarity with the people). I think my arguments are more than enough to prove why this paragraph in and of itself does not need to exist. You're the one with more interest in keeping it and your track record of environmentalism edits on Wiki seem to back up your conflict of interest. Do what you want with your COI report but I know I'm clear. Imaslee pviking ( talk ) 16:37, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am just trying to report the facts. My opinion was not included in my addition, but yours is in the removal. Someone had added the website to the page previously, but that didn't sufficiently meet WP standards, so I tried to find a reliable source in order to include something that might be relevant to the section. Voila! I quickly found a published newspaper article (which thus fit within WP's guidelines) that had been written about the website. I see absolutely no reason why it can't be permitted as a citation related to the section's content. I'm not opposed to shortening it, but so far, you've only expressed a desire to remove. Why?

In lieu of a compromise, how about if this is added at the end of the first paragraph on water quality:

In 2008, the Intelligencer Journal reported that the nonprofit group League of Humane Voters created a website, Lititzwater.org, "dedicated to the cause of monitoring issues surrounding the Lititz watershed."^[1]

Athene cunicularia (talk) 19:11, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Web site focuses on Lititz water: League of Humane Voters adopts cause

Borden edit

The section was reworded by someone else for the better, I supported that change, and it was still reverted. Why? It makes no sense to revert to a more poorly worded, less concise, and less accurate version.Athene cunicularia (talk) 21:27, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, basic non-destructive edits like the one initially made don't need to be justified on the talk page as you requested.Athene cunicularia (talk) 21:29, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Recent Edits

I lack the rollback feature, so it took me a couple of edits before i could get the page back to where it was. I don't know if Steve Palkovich is someone notable or not, and i really don't care. Once i see someone writes that Britney Spears lives here, it doesn't matter what they write afterward; it will still be considered horse crap.TheBigZzz (talk) 23:46, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oldest Independence Day?

Bristol, RI also claims this, and it claims to date back to 1785. Can someone illuminate the nature of Lititz' claim? PRRfan (talk) 13:30, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am honestly not sure. It's something that the town has always said (I've lived and worked here most of my life). They may be wrong. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 14:05, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This might contribute to the issue. Bristol claims to have the "longest continuous-running celebration", but there are no records regarding the celebration from 1839 to 1850 [1], and their parade was only in scattered years when it first started [2]. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 14:10, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, i question the date. Literature disseminated to Lititz businesses for advertising in this year's Program seem to indicate that 2009 will be the 192nd consecutive celebration, which would put the beginning at 1817, not 1813. TheBigZzz (talk) 13:48, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, that would put the date at 1818, and that may be correct. A 3 and an 8 can be easily confused and may have been miswritten. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 16:23, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Racist Incident

Question whether this section is necessary. Is it really noteworthy that some hick threw a ball of paper at kid and called him a racist name? 70.15.112.168 (talk) 06:34, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's more related to the school but still notable. And considering the coverage it received around here (and should receive anywhere it happens in this country), it is certainly important, just maybe not to this article. — KV5 • Talk • 11:04, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Trump server

Most pinged Trump server by Russian bank during 2016 election.--Wikipietime (talk) 02:55, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Lititz, Pennsylvania. 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, 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) 07:06, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Lititz, Pennsylvania. 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, 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) 07:47, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Victor

Wasn't Lititz the home of the world famous rodent snap traps? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.115.238.102 (talk) 21:27, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Lititz, Pennsylvania. 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, 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) 18:34, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[lol23-1] Web site focuses on Lititz water: League of Humane Voters adopts cause

[1]