"

 false accusations, Historic Jonesborough, etc. 

Sorry to bother the current and future editors following this article, but it seems this article is to be added to a long list of articles where I have edited where long-time adversary Orlady follows and finds fault.  I don't get her motivation.  This to explain some back and forth editing on this article which you may see.

1. I added mention of the NRHP listing in 1969 of the Jonesboro Historic District, which she then disputed, adding a silly citation needed tag.  As she is well aware from long discussion at the article for that district, it is NRHP listed, that is factual, it is not seriously in doubt.

2. I added general mention of the fact that ""A larger area has been promoted as ""Historic Jonesborough"" since then"", to which she added a wp:OR tag and/or removed it in subsequent edits.  In one edit summary, Orlady stated that it ""is speculation and synthesis, including the concepts of ""larger,"" ""promoted as,"" and ""since then."" Not merely an issue of needing a citation.""

Orlady has read numerous webpages of the Historic Jonesborough organization, which I believe was created after 1969 and which certainly has promoted a larger area than the NRHP-listed historic district as Historic Jonesborough since then.  It is a fact, not even a controversial one that the organization has promoted an area since 1969, that the area is larger than the NRHP-listed historic district.  The Historic Jonesborough webpages mention the historic district but do not name it, and they are i-think-deliberately vague on the boundaries of the district but nonetheless adequately imply that the Historic Jonesborough area is larger.  Further, I have verified the facts by reading the NRHP nom document which identifies the area of the historic district, and compared that Historic Jonesborough documents promoting inns and motels inside and outside of that district.  

I don't think this amounts to wp:SYNTH which is original research, to be avoided as perhaps it might advance a controversial POV position.  I believe the current article no longer mentions Historic Jonesborough, which ought to be given pretty salient coverage in the history of this town, for its actions to preserve and promote the town.  

3. Orlady changes the name of the historic district to display as ""Jonesborough Historic District"" rather than to display as the name it was given in the NRHP listing, ""Jonesboro Historic District"".  That change is possibly implementing wp:OR, as there appear not to be evidence the NRHP listing name is changed.  There is discussion ongoing in a requested move at Talk:Jonesboro Historic District (Jonesborough, Tennessee);  I think the official, original name should be displayed here unless and until there is a different resolution at the article on the district itself.

Perhaps other editors would like to comment on what are the facts, and/or to step in to fix up the article.  Or perhaps you all would prefer to avoid this.  Again, sorry to have brought dispute to here. ncram "