Talk:Elgin, Kershaw County, South Carolina

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Elgin, Kershaw County, South Carolina. 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://www.webcitation.org/6YSasqtfX?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.census.gov%2Fprod%2Fwww%2Fdecennial.html to http://www.census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 12:34, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Question for editors

Hello,

I am a new editor to Wikipedia. I wanted to ask an admin if they believe "White Pond, SC" is enough of a notable location to warrant its own specific page. It is an archaeological site that is the location of an ongoing, large archaeological investigation regarding both early Clovis people occupation, as well as core samples.

Information about it currently resides on the page for Elgin, SC. I believe more information could be included about the site, placing it on the Elgin page might overwhelm it with too much information.

With your guidance and permission, I plan to start a new page and begin compiling it.

Drew Marshall

Cryptohydrate (talk) 20:21, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

I am making this a general help request, as any editor may answer this question. It doesn't require the use of the admin tools. Admins have no more authority than any other editor. 331dot (talk) 20:50, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. Cryptohydrate (talk) 21:16, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Normally, we would add additional material to the existing article - though I'd suggest moving the White Pond material out of 'Geography' into its own section. Once that section is large enough, it will be time to consider creating a separate page for it. There is no need to worry in advance about the Elgin page becoming overwhelmed. Also, by doing it in this manner, the notability of the subject as its own page can be easily determined based on the sources given.

Also, while you are working on the section, you might want to fix the appearance of CITEBOMBING - any time there are three or more footnotes on a sentence, it indicates to me that there's a possible problem. Often, it is the result of an editor attempting synthesis - of attempting to write something based on multiple sources that no one source can support. Or, worse, simply pointing to a pile of sources without actually using what they say about the subject. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:14, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Pinging Cryptohydrate - normally, the {{help}} templates are to be used on your own user talk page. When they are not, the answerer needs to be reminded sometimes to include a ping to the asker. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:17, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

10-4 Cryptohydrate (talk) 03:00, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

This is helpful guidance. I’ll review CITEBOMBING and rework. There is an existing sentence with 4 citations on the page prior to my edit. Would that also fall under CITEBOMBING?

Cryptohydrate (talk) 02:59, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Cryptohydrate: the citebombing page mentions a lot of different things to call citation overkill, but may not provide a good warning against synthesis. But, yes, a sentence with 4 footnotes will usually be seen as an example. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:33, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! I'll make the edits tomorrow and then ping you on the talk page for a quick review if you don't mind. I don't plan to add much at first, but there's some interesting history in this area that isn't included, such as the rare fauna and flora that inhabits these unusual dunes, the history of the hunting club including visits from Eisenhower, and archaeological digs in 2015-2020 and 2022. I also have original photographs I've taken from the site which I could include, just depends on what is reasonable without overdoing it. Still learning this editing thing. Lot of fun. Cryptohydrate (talk) 05:04, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Jmcgnh

Good morning. I've made some edits, though will likely return to make additional changes and do cleanup as I continue to learn the finer points of editing. I also added my own photo from the site taken in 2019.

Drew Cryptohydrate (talk) 15:41, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Cryptohydrate: Should not insert photo of lake in front of infobox. I still see citation overkill in some places and lack of citations in others in what I think is material you've added or worked on. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:58, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Got it. There was no thumbnail so I thought since this was the most notable location it would make sense, is there a way for me to move the photo down and have it still act as the page thumb?

I’ll look to balance citations out tomorrow and clean up a few misplaced periods. I’ll @ you when complete @jmcgnh Cryptohydrate (talk) 09:12, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

I hope you'll not be offended if I point out that the pond photo is rather nondescript. I don't see it as showing anything distinctive about the site, much less about the subject of the article. If you have a photo of the more densely built up part of the settlement, that might be a better key photo to use in the infobox for the article about the town. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:56, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

One more thing. Don't upload photos that you've downloaded from Facebook, even if they are your own photos. It's much easier to establish they are your own photos if they retain the camera metatdata. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:59, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Great call, I will see if I can turn on the old phone and get the originals. Cheers. Cryptohydrate (talk) 14:35, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Jmcgnh

Just searched for the photos on my old phone and don't see them. I'll ping some of the archaeologists and see if they have originals that would be more suitable.

The town is rather unremarkable so not sure if a picture of the main street would be more notable than the White Pond site. But definitely should be able to find a photo of the lodge/lake view which would be more sensible for White Pond. Cheers

Drew Cryptohydrate (talk) 16:32, 27 January 2023 (UTC)