This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:
|
While each individual admission of a territory as a state into the United States maybe notable, the subject of the generic event may not meet WP:EVENT. Therefore, I have tagged this article. I think perhaps this article should be made as a redirect to List of U.S. states by date of admission to the Union, with the content here moved to that page, as an explanation/background of the process of admission, and possibly expanded. Moreover, the section U.S. state#Admission into the union is already larger than this entire article, and perhaps that is a better redirect target.-- RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 01:50, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
I appreciate the paragraph at the end of the The process of admission section that addresses changes to the borders of established states, and I appreciate that the list includes "numerous minor adjustments to state boundaries over the years due to improved surveys, resolution of ambiguous or disputed boundary definitions, or minor mutually agreed boundary adjustments for administrative convenience or other purposes." However there are some such border changes involving areas which, although they may have been sparsely populated at the time, are geographically too large to be considered minor. They are...
and especially
I got my information from the article titled Territorial evolution of the United States. By the way, based on the introduction in that article, I think we both failed to include Georgia in our lists. Unless I'm mistaken, the Southwest Territory was only the North Carolina cession of its Washington District.
HankW512 ( talk) 01:13, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
I'm surprised this article has neither a section about proposed states that have not yet been admitted nor a link to such a section in another article. I would like very much to learn the reason(s) for the long delay in presenting the people of Puerto Rico with another referendum regarding the commonwealth's status. I fully agree with the U.S. government's response to Puerto Rico's December 11, 2012 request for statehood, which was the January 17, 2014 request of, and offer to pay for, another referendum regarding status to be presented to the Puerto Rican people due to the poor wording of the November 6, 2012 referendum on which the statehood request was based.
HankW512 ( talk) 01:31, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
Is the sentence "The legislature of Massachusetts consented to the admission of Maine in 1790" correct? Did Massachusetts really consent to this 30 years before it happened? -- Jfruh ( talk) 03:39, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
Although I think 1819 is right, I was surprised to learn from Madison's notes that in 1787 when the Constitution was being drafted, the admission of Maine to the Union in the near future was already anticipated. While writing the admission-to-the-Union clause of the Constitution, the drafters discussed the probable near-future admissions of Mayne [sic], Kentucky, Vermont, and Franklin. Franklin was never admitted and Maine waited another 33 years after that. Michael Hardy ( talk) 18:11, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
The following is extremely misleading:
Although the use of an enabling act was a common historic practice, a number of territories drafted constitutions for submission to Congress without one, and were admitted to the Union.
A reader could think that it means no state was ever admitted to the Union without first submitting a constitution to Congress. That is false: Congress passed an act admitting Kentucky to the Union before Kentucky's constitution was drafted. I changed it to read as follows:
Although the use of an enabling act was a common historic practice, a number of states were admitted to the Union without one.
This edit by "Drdpw" misses the point as completely as can be imagined. Michael Hardy ( talk) 16:58, 12 June 2017 (UTC) @ Drdpw: @ TJRC:
We need to make this article clear about several points:
Michael Hardy ( talk) 17:25, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Admission to the Union. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.danvillekentucky.com/list/member/constitution-square-historic-site-28lwebsite%3Ddanvillekentucky.comWhen 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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:07, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
The admission process section is not clear on the legal mechanism for forming a state. It blends the legal requirements, the usual procedures (constitutional conventions), and the territorial history. It would be helpful if these would be addressed separately. And it doesn't talk at all about the parliamentary procedures in Congress. In particular:
Thanks -- Macrakis ( talk) 21:29, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Readers come here from Google looking for the number of votes required in congress to add a state, and I can't seem to find anything about this mentioned in the article. Is it 2/3 majority in both house and senate? Can we add this? Cstanford.math ( talk) 21:52, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:
|
While each individual admission of a territory as a state into the United States maybe notable, the subject of the generic event may not meet WP:EVENT. Therefore, I have tagged this article. I think perhaps this article should be made as a redirect to List of U.S. states by date of admission to the Union, with the content here moved to that page, as an explanation/background of the process of admission, and possibly expanded. Moreover, the section U.S. state#Admission into the union is already larger than this entire article, and perhaps that is a better redirect target.-- RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 01:50, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
I appreciate the paragraph at the end of the The process of admission section that addresses changes to the borders of established states, and I appreciate that the list includes "numerous minor adjustments to state boundaries over the years due to improved surveys, resolution of ambiguous or disputed boundary definitions, or minor mutually agreed boundary adjustments for administrative convenience or other purposes." However there are some such border changes involving areas which, although they may have been sparsely populated at the time, are geographically too large to be considered minor. They are...
and especially
I got my information from the article titled Territorial evolution of the United States. By the way, based on the introduction in that article, I think we both failed to include Georgia in our lists. Unless I'm mistaken, the Southwest Territory was only the North Carolina cession of its Washington District.
HankW512 ( talk) 01:13, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
I'm surprised this article has neither a section about proposed states that have not yet been admitted nor a link to such a section in another article. I would like very much to learn the reason(s) for the long delay in presenting the people of Puerto Rico with another referendum regarding the commonwealth's status. I fully agree with the U.S. government's response to Puerto Rico's December 11, 2012 request for statehood, which was the January 17, 2014 request of, and offer to pay for, another referendum regarding status to be presented to the Puerto Rican people due to the poor wording of the November 6, 2012 referendum on which the statehood request was based.
HankW512 ( talk) 01:31, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
Is the sentence "The legislature of Massachusetts consented to the admission of Maine in 1790" correct? Did Massachusetts really consent to this 30 years before it happened? -- Jfruh ( talk) 03:39, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
Although I think 1819 is right, I was surprised to learn from Madison's notes that in 1787 when the Constitution was being drafted, the admission of Maine to the Union in the near future was already anticipated. While writing the admission-to-the-Union clause of the Constitution, the drafters discussed the probable near-future admissions of Mayne [sic], Kentucky, Vermont, and Franklin. Franklin was never admitted and Maine waited another 33 years after that. Michael Hardy ( talk) 18:11, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
The following is extremely misleading:
Although the use of an enabling act was a common historic practice, a number of territories drafted constitutions for submission to Congress without one, and were admitted to the Union.
A reader could think that it means no state was ever admitted to the Union without first submitting a constitution to Congress. That is false: Congress passed an act admitting Kentucky to the Union before Kentucky's constitution was drafted. I changed it to read as follows:
Although the use of an enabling act was a common historic practice, a number of states were admitted to the Union without one.
This edit by "Drdpw" misses the point as completely as can be imagined. Michael Hardy ( talk) 16:58, 12 June 2017 (UTC) @ Drdpw: @ TJRC:
We need to make this article clear about several points:
Michael Hardy ( talk) 17:25, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Admission to the Union. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.danvillekentucky.com/list/member/constitution-square-historic-site-28lwebsite%3Ddanvillekentucky.comWhen 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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:07, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
The admission process section is not clear on the legal mechanism for forming a state. It blends the legal requirements, the usual procedures (constitutional conventions), and the territorial history. It would be helpful if these would be addressed separately. And it doesn't talk at all about the parliamentary procedures in Congress. In particular:
Thanks -- Macrakis ( talk) 21:29, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Readers come here from Google looking for the number of votes required in congress to add a state, and I can't seem to find anything about this mentioned in the article. Is it 2/3 majority in both house and senate? Can we add this? Cstanford.math ( talk) 21:52, 8 November 2020 (UTC)