Talk:Storrs, Connecticut

UConn Village Name Determination

Hello, I'm a UConn Daily Campus contributor who has undertaken extensive research into topics related but not limited to the history of the various student activities. I have been doing so for a long time, and understand that one point that has had a controversial discussion here is the official name(s) of the geographical subdivisions which contain the main UConn campus.

Namely, the municipality (Town of Mansfield) and the name of its core hamlet (village). Prior users have used incomplete methodologies or have broken other Wikipedia rules sullying civil discussion. In an effort to replace a dead link and factually satisfy the edit, I was informed that starting another discussion here is either the policy or preference. While some of their arguments may have been rooted in good ideas, I am here to propose my own.

Because I am not employed by the Town of Mansfield, University of Connecticut, or any government, to make edits and participate in this discussion would not be a conflict of interest on my part. Undertherock.dc (talk) 23:47, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

This brings us to my position: As explained in the Daily Campus article titled "What's in a name? Demystifying UConn's 'town' name", "Storrs-Mansfield" is the official name of this community. The historical alternative "Storrsville" erroneously morphed into "Storrsv." and "Storrs" - and, of course, its common yet incorrect status is known, but not official.

As for prior arguments and even the literary references here, which have their own inconsistencies and errors, if a specific point was raised I would be happy to discuss it - but do not intend to dissect each and every point debated in the past unless they may be relevant at hand. Undertherock.dc (talk) 23:51, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

The end of the Daily Campus article signs off with “See you again next week — until then, I’m going back “Under the Rock.” " which is eerily similar to your username. Did you write the article/source you are citing? R0paire 00:06, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

R0paire, that may matter not - for the claim being made can be supported by numerous secondary sources.

However, if your inquiring mind still wants to know, I'll point to the use of "my" in the previous reply. There's nothing eerie about it, since any user may be able to make the same edit that I did and reference the same article. Undertherock.dc (talk) 00:21, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Nonetheless, are there any other new sources in support not introduced in previous discussions? R0paire 00:46, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

When you say sources in support, what are you referring to? In support of using the village's official name, as opposed to a common but unofficial one?

While I haven't inspected each and every previously-presented source discretely, perhaps my question would be: For Wikipedia, what would disqualify them? A cursory look seems to show that there are more than enough from a mix governmental and "citizen-produced" sources, not to mention the Daily Campus' usage going back years. Undertherock.dc (talk) 02:21, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

I feel it's pretty obvious I meant in support of the proposed changes. The previous discussion ended in a pretty strong consensus against similar changes, albeit still being in favour of it's inclusion as a possible alternative name. So ideally there should be additional new sources to make an even stronger argument in favour of changing from Storrs to Storrs-Mansfield.

If the only new source is the one you wrote, it's rather gamey because it bypasses the whole point of WP:NPOV, WP:RS and WP:V. This discussion seems rather premature if that is the only new source. R0paire 02:54, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

I think this is something people have previously gotten confused about. I, for one, am not suggesting that Wikipedia replace every reference to "Storrs" with "Storrs-Mansfield". Primarily, I made edits to the two chief articles respecting the primacy of the official name and properly identifying Storrs as the alternative name.

As for the "consensus" that was purportedly reached in prior discussions, it is clear that there wasn't much of any - mostly due to the frantic handling of it all. It still doesn't address the apparent disqualification of any previously-presented source - there seems to be about a hundred, from every corner including the town, state, UConn, and others. How many more do we need?

My so-called "new source" in the form of this Daily Campus article uses information from droves of physical ephemera at the UConn archives and adapted from some interviewing. I don't see how the edits go against any of the policies you linked: replacing dead references with an available and reliable one, and if Wikipedia thinks that "Storrs" still has a place in the article I'm not inclined to remove it, but it isn't the only alternative name (Storrsville) and was never official.

If enough people misspelled Worcester as "Wooster" throughout history, and people kept doing it even today, would that mean that Wikipedia should prioritize "Wooster" without allowing any mention of its official name, Worcester? Undertherock.dc (talk) 03:37, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

• Note that Undertherock.dc has been blocked as an obvious sockpuppet of User:Jonathanhusky. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:08, 17 April 2025 (UTC)