Jump to content

Talk:Hopewell, New Jersey

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Merrill Lynch Corporate Campus is Also in Hopewell. Joy.

No, It is in Hopewell Twp, not Boro. 69.141.147.36 01:41, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

John Hart [1], one of many who signed the United States Declaration of Independence, is buried in Hopewell.

just thought it would be a good idea to add something on transportation perhaps, and also something on the Hopewell Frog war (Mannybrown1 (talk) 02:49, 19 June 2008 (UTC))[reply]

relavance of The Hopewell Project

[edit]

To me this looks like it is a add for the company but most of all, the section is in both Hopewell township, and Hopewell Borough. The house that is involved cannot be in both municipalities. It is irrelevant —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mannybrown1 (talk • contribs) 21:55, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

disambiguation page

[edit]

Given the multiple (4 at last count) locations in the state named Hopewell, I would move that we create a new article, Hopewell Borough, Mercer County, New Jersey, and make this article the disambiguation article. Reason being is that, just from a population standpoint, the borough is the 3rd most important "Hopewell", with the two townships considerabl more populated. Famartin (talk) 02:10, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnocentric statement of "discovery" of gold

[edit]

How can you discovery something the existence of which has already been established although those that proclaim it discovered were mistaken. Gold was found in California w/early explorers along Colorado River & near Mexican era Los Angeles in 1832 so existence of gold only confirmed not discovered in 1848 although the find was reason for the 1849 Rush, the latter the unique part of incident. To say that gold was discovered in California in 1848 is an ethnocentric statement as well as an example of ignorance by those that either do not want to acknowledge that gold had already been verified as being in California therefore it cannot be a discovery. Finding more gold is not a discovery but a re-confirmation of the existence of gold in the area.66.74.176.59 (talk) 01:40, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fine. Whatever. Tired of arguing about it. You win. PS - Next time you want to make minor wording tweaks, don't make a soap box speech about it, just do it. Soap box speeches invoke knee-jerk reactions especially when they come form anonymous ip's. Oh, and get a regular username, for crying out out. Famartin (talk) 03:46, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not fine or whatever. If your actions are based on knee jerk judgment then it might be best to understand the issue than detrimental to WP long range intent. as for the other statement, which I am not at all surprised, please read the following: == IP user identification ==

PLEASE refrain from appearing prejudicial about my continued WP participant with an IP. Yes, I know about user names and do not have one. That is explanation far more than what the question is worth. Nothing against those that do have a user name. AGAIN -- PLEASE, refrain from appearing prejudicial especially by those that seem to take great pleasure toward those with which they disagree about WP content and attack the IP user for being identified as such.66.74.176.59 (talk) 14:29, 19 September 2014 (UTC)66.74.176.59 (talk) 04:14, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can you blame me, or anyone, when 80% of vandalism on Wikipedia is from unregistered users, as stated here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IP_addresses_are_not_people Famartin (talk) 04:22, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is not the time to apologize. No one is blaming any one just a lack of taking the time to review before revert/delete that stem from MANY reverts by WP user name editors. And this is from a group of people that champion themselves as the ultimate keepers of WP. Use your experience not as a tool to thwart new contributors to WP, not that I am at all that NEW to WP.66.74.176.59 (talk) 05:23, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, interesting the use of "vandalism" in this situation. Vandalism is 100% vandalism not 80%. maybe you meant 80% of edits done by UP user WP editors is vandalism? but then I am not in a position to know what it is that you wished to express.66.74.176.59 (talk) 05:25, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Hopewell, 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, 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) 22:48, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Land Title Voiding Issue called the Coxe Scandal or Affair

[edit]

I've just been researching ancestry that went from Hopewell NJ to Rowan Cty North Carolina. The presentation in the history section needs some adjustments, and the heart of the conflict deserves naming.

See: "the Coxe affair" in this article https://minerdescent.com/tag/coxe-affair/

and this section, "Coxe dives into Colonial politics" in this piece http://www.mastermason.com/njlore1786/Papers/Daniel%20Coxe.pdf


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Coxe - which only partially explains the matter 


NorieNC (talk) 22:21, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hopewell, 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, 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) 17:07, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Hopewell, New Jersey

[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Hopewell, New Jersey's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Census2020":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 01:51, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hopewell,_New_Jersey&oldid=1201247039"