This article is within the scope of WikiProject Connecticut, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Connecticut 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.ConnecticutWikipedia:WikiProject ConnecticutTemplate:WikiProject ConnecticutConnecticut articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S.
historic sites listed on the
National Register of Historic Places 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.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles
In view of (1) the fact that the reported size of this HD is inexplicably much greater than the area immediately associated with the ferry and (2) the discovery (confirmed in several instances and suspected in others) of extra zeros on NRIS acreages for other historic districts in Connecticut (see
Talk:Wauregan and
Talk:Willington Common Historic District) and elsewhere (see
Talk:Norris District and
Talk:Norris, Tennessee), I suspect that the area of this HD is actually 230 acres, not 2300 acres. --
Orlady (
talk)
20:59, 21 July 2009 (UTC)reply
I've added a Word document made from the OCR results. I reformatted and re-proofed the first few pages, but you'll likely want to continue the effort, with the original PDF open as well. Enjoy. -
Denimadept (
talk)
03:51, 23 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Thanks for your several efforts here: getting the docs from the National Register, posting them, OCR-scanning and posting the text one. I have recently only been able to connect on a slow internet connection, and was not able to download the full PDF when i tried yesterday, so glad u made this extra effort. Thanks!
doncram (
talk)
14:23, 23 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Actually, i wonder if someone could check the Jan Cunningham preparation date in the PDF version for me. The OCR'd version reports the prep date (in Section 11) as 12/30/2005, but the date should usually be earlier than the NRHP listing date, which seems to be earlier in 2005. I used the 12/30/2005 date just now in the article, would be happy to see it corrected if it is wrong. Or is the NRHP listing date in the article wrong? Thanks.
doncram (
talk)
14:35, 23 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Looks to me as though there are a number of dates. A stamp looks like it is dated 2005-08-08, the certification signature is 2005-07-05, entry into the National Register signature is dated 2005-09-21, and form preparation date is 2005-12-30 (for Harford county, on page 26!). Whatever. -
Denimadept (
talk)
15:07, 23 July 2009 (UTC)reply
In my humble opinion, "2005" would be plenty good enough as a date citation for that document, particularly in view of the confusion. It's not as if it's a citation to a published periodical (where the date is important for finding it) or an article about news event (where it may be important to indicate when the account was written). --
Orlady (
talk)
15:39, 23 July 2009 (UTC)reply