![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
The Supreme Court of CT ruled on 10/10/08 that same-sex marriages should be recognized in CT. This should be added to this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.69.137.7 ( talk) 00:35, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Apparently include a department of "mental retardation" according to the article. Unless I'm hilariously mistaken, no should object to my deletion of it.
--Dude, do not be stupid. Why don't you google first? There is a Department of Mental Retardation in CT, [ [1]].
The name has still not been changed as of 1/31/07, although the General Assembly may take the issue up this session. 71.235.204.17 16:35, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Changed officially 1st October '07 to Department of Developmental Services. I've amended the text. See http://www.ct.gov/dds/cwp/view.asp?Q=395946&A=2645 Rojomoke 11:07, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
According to the State Register of Connecticut ( http://www.sots.ct.gov/RegisterManual/SectionVII/towninfo.htm#CITIES%20IN%20CONNECTICUT%20WITH%20DATE%20OF%20INCORPORATION), there are only 21 cities in Connecticut. This includes the 19 merged city-towns, and the two cities (Groton and Winsted) which are not merged.
They are: Ansonia, Bridgeport, Bristol, Danbury, Derby, Groton, Hartford, Meriden, Middletown, Milford, New Britain, New Haven, New London, Norwalk, Norwich, Shelton, Stamford, Torrington, Waterbury, West Haven, and Winsted (Winchester).
The remaining 150 MCDs are towns. There are a couple places in the government section which refer to towns as cities and cities as towns and vice versa. I'm not really sure what to do with this. Americans from outside New England will have trouble making the distinction between a city and a town in New England because city status is not the same thing.
Ultimately, it is factually incorrect to refer to Manchester and West Hartford as cities, even if they are urban areas. mikemillerdc 03:22, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
The new Principal cities section (which lists almost of the state's incorporated cities, but no towns, in declining order of population) seems "quaint" (at best). There are many towns in Connecticut that are larger than a bunch of the cities on the list (for example, consider Fairfield, Greenwich, Hamden, Manchester, and Stratford, all of which have 50,000 or more people). What's up?-- orlady 21:25, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Is this "Principal cities" section supposed to be a list of actual principal cities (as defined by the Office of Management and Budget) or just a list of towns with the biggest populations? -- Polaron | Talk 18:31, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
This has now been handled via List_of_municipalities_of_Connecticut_by_population, which combines all manner of municipalities into a single list, and allows the other lists to remain undisturbed, since they list those municipalities with particular forms of government. -- Yellowdesk 05:41, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
mikemillerdc 20:38, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
In an earlier edit, User:208.58.4.72 changed Lieberman to an Independent in the infobox (but not in the text). I'm not sure this is appropriate. While he won election as a representative of the "Connecticut for Lieberman" party, he has stated his intention to caucus with the democrats, and I am not sure he ever ended his political affiliation with the democratic party. mikemillerdc 19:22, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Officially, though, Joe Lieberman is an Independent, but caucuses most of the time with Democrats. However, that doesn't make him a Democrat since the party pretty much gave him the boot when he lost the primary to Ned Lamont. Being an Independent also reflects more accurately on Lieberman, as he has on numerous occasions crossed party lines on major issues, and has a very centrist viewpoint in the political arena. Ironically Lieberman has been receiving most of his support from Connecticut's Republicans and a large share of unaffiliated voters, while he has lost support among the state's Democrats.
I think that you should add the indian relations!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sum383 ( talk • contribs) .
The Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. states format has been updated to include a new Sports section, that covers collegiate sports, amateur sports, and non-team sports (such as hunting and fishing). Please feel free to add this new heading, and supply information about sports in Connecticut. Please see South_carolina#Sports_in_South_Carolina as an example. NorCalHistory 13:36, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
I have twice reverted part of an edit relating to proposed ferry service. I removed the italicized portion
The state has encouraged traffic reduction schemes, including rail use and ride-sharing[12], and it has proposed ferry service in Long Island Sound. [2]
The last edit summary was: (reinsert ferry service; the cited website states that the LIS Ferry Coalition was created by agencies of both CT and NY to promote ferries for transportation.)
The LIS Ferry coalition is a coordinating group. It was created by the New York Metropolitan Planning Council, and includes agencies from Connecticut and Rhode Island as well. It does not have the power to propose anything, just to pass on information and promote ideas.
The website does not seem to have a specific proposal involving ferry service for Connecticut. Were there to be such a proposal, it would be unlikely to be in the form of a traffic congestion mitigation proposal.
So, 1) just because LISFC likes something, does not mean that there is a proposal, 2) I could find no proposal, 3) LISFC is not an arm of the State of Connecticut, and 3) there is no source for the State of Connecticut having such a proposal. Jd2718 13:15, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
According to CBS News's "Making the Grade" map of U.S. states and some key educational statistics for each, Connecticut has a most unusual stat. The data claims that it has a "Student/Teacher Ratio: 2.6 to 1". That's two teachers for every five students, as opposed to the much more common rates of 12-20 to 1. Can this be correct? How would this be fiscally possible? I came to this article to see if Wikipedia had any suggestion, but I find that the only education discussed for this state is college/university level and boarding schools. I would think that such a remarkable ratio would indicate something worth citing about Connecticut's K-12 programs. Does anyone have any information on this subject? ~ Jeff Q (talk) 05:38, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
...redlinked, though this would make an inane separate article. Tagged "citation required" although the ext. link (Connecticut State Library) "Connecticut's "Southwick Jog" gives a much more sensible account than this Wikipedia article. I'd fix this myself, but the references system here is a cat's cardle. -- Wetman 05:20, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
I think it is best for it to be cut in diffrent articles. Fattdoggy 15:21, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
There is now a proposed WikiProject to deal with the state of Connecticut at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Connecticut. Any parties interested in taking part in such a project should indicate as much there, so that we can know if there is sufficient interest to create it. Thank you. Badbilltucker 16:52, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
The template being used for this article is wrong. This template should only be used for cities. Can you please use a template:Infobox state instead of template:Infobox city. Thank you! Furthermore, the request is based on the principal that the common denominator, per the new category UTC-5 demonstrates that cities generally have the state or province name. Take for example Ottawa which should redirect to Ottawa, Ontario and not vis-versa. This will help when categorizing cities. -- CyclePat 00:35, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm a newbie here, so apologies if this is in the wrong place or otherwise incomplete. When using Google Earth, if you look just southwest of Montauk, NY, in the Atlantic Ocean, you will see the Wikipedia dot for Connecticut. The coordinates are obviously incorrect. Can someone fix that, as I'm not sure where those erroneous coordinates come from. Thanks! Cdmcquee 03:54, 31 January 2007 (UTC)-- Cdmcquee 03:54, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
We may as well split this discussion into multiple articles, because it is longer than the real article about Connecticut. I feel the Connecticut article is the proper length.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.120.45.119 ( talk) 17:33, 10 February 2007
How come the article was change around? It read well without the New England reference in there. The New England article mention CT in teh NYC tri-state area was taken out also. It was perfect the way it was.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.235.81.39 ( talk) 19:36, 9 March 2007
Why no ESPN reference? MrM 05:39, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
"Connecticut is the most Italian-American state percentage-wise, just above Rhode Island." This statement is incorrect, Connecticut has the second highest percentage of Italian-Americans (18.6%) just behind Rhode Island (19%). Could someone please fix this? -DCR
The article says, regarding what do you call someone from Connecticut: "Nutmegger" is sometimes used, as is "Yankee."[13] The footnote takes you to the Connecticut State Library where there is no mention of the use of Yankee to denote a Connecticut resident. Perhaps "Yankee" should be omitted or another reference found? -- Ttommott 11:50, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
Comments requested on whether separate CDP articles for town centers are necessary. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Connecticut#Comments requested regarding CDP articles. -- Polaron | Talk 23:11, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
You know what's odd?
There's a full article on Economy of Connecticut in the Hebrew Wikipedia, but not here ... -- Amir E. Aharoni ( talk) 21:39, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
See reasoning at Template talk:Connecticut#All towns listing. Individual county templates were removed in favor of a state template that has been expanded to list all towns and boroughs. Comments are requested. -- Polaron | Talk 16:55, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Please do not return this information to the artilce without a citation.-- BirgitteSB 18:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
I thought that the state motto should have a source. If it already does, then just tell me. I just wanted to check with everybody before doing anything. If you look here, this explains how they came to the motto and their explantation. Thanks,
Conor69 ( talk) 10:16, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
Data from the Association of Religion Data Archives (ARDA) apparently contradicts the survey at the beginning of the religion section. But the ARDA data seems more accurate to me. The survey cited at the beginning of the religion section on the other hand switches between single denominations and groups of denominations all the time. Mk4711 ( talk) 16:15, 20 September 2008 (UTC) people there live it thug style —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.190.254.86 ( talk) 00:22, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm from the UK, so may well be missing something, but this looks odd to me:
"Fall months are mild, and bring foliage across the state in October and November."
Surely trees have foliage all summer as well! I'm assuming what's meant is fall colours, but it doesn't say so. 86.132.138.159 ( talk) 01:12, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
connecticuts state flower is the Mountain laurel. Bird is american robin.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.57.252.43 ( talk) 00:32, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
This one appears to be invalid - returns 404 not found message- need to either validate or remove Connecticut State Register & Manual http://www.sots.ct.gov/RegisterManual/regman.htm 209.16.117.50 ( talk) 21:19, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
According to the wiki entry, "Connecticut (pronounced /kəˈnɛtɪkət/; the second C is silent)" is the correct way to say the name of the state. However, I do pronounce the second 'C' in Connecticut, although the 'T' is obviously stressed. Maybe this is just because my family is filled with New Yorkers, but I thought I might as well bring it up. -- 68.109.116.107 17:15, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
Most people actually pronounce it Conn-en-i-cut, which is wrong, but everyone understands it nonetheless George kaplan 00:00, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Although I am native also, growing up I did try to pronounce it as it was spelled, but people either corrected me or said it in the common way. I would like to know the correct pronunciation myself. People in Missouri pronounce it Mis-surra, but I pronoun it Mis-surri. I am sure that is the case for a few other states as well. I still don't understand why Arkansas is not Ar-Kansas...-- 71.235.81.39 13:30, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm from Hartford County and the vast majority of people I know pronounce it Cuh-ned-i-cut. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.99.141.48 ( talk) 03:41, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
How come there are always exceptions or tri-state is in quotes as if it is some sort or lie or joke? In this case, they write: "From a statistical and economic perspective, southwestern Connecticut is part of the Tri-State Region." That line sounds like excuses are being made fro CT being in the NYC area and that it only exists from a "statistical"(who's statistics?) and economic(huh?) perspective. Who's perspective is this? It must be Boston's and New England supporters. That is not our perspective. We are a part of the Tri-state area because we are near NYC, get their media, transportation, share their culture(yes. try finding a New England culture. when something is happening in NYC, it is happening in CT, then is gets to the rest of the nation.), land, water and NYC is the hub of the Tri-state area as is the case with any major city.
It does not hurt to admit the truth. If you can, please stop trying to short-change us on this. Hartford says they are "the shining star of New England," so that should be good enough for you guys who like the New England thing. I like the addition, but it just seems as if it was put there to be there, but not put put forth with force. It is written from a POV as if the Tri-state should not or was not supposed to be. Boston (not bashing) is too far away and too small for them to have any influence on CT. They act like they own New England or something. They act as if because one part of what was 'theirs' should be reclaimed because it does not see Boston as a hub or de facto capital. Reality is reality. I have seen a HUGE influx of plates from New England down the 203 way, the like of which I have NEVER seen before. It is almost as if Boston took out an ad and paid New Englanders to move down here. No matter, like the Greeks and Romans going to Egypt, they ll have no choice but to adapt to the local (NYC area) culture.
I just hope that when you mention CT and the Tri-state area, you put as much definite statements as you do about Boston and New England. With them, there are no doubts about what they are. With us, it makes it appear as if you don't take it seirously and that we are really New Englanders pretending to be New Yorkers. When you are in Greenwich and you can literally walk across the street and be in NY , then you will begin to see that the imaginary line known as "New England" is fiction and was only good for the USA's colonial past between the Dutch and the English.-- 71.235.81.39 00:04, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
See, you double-talk a lot. You tell me to relax because New England is "just a place," but clearly in your mind it is more than just a place since you also mention my living 'within IT'S borders." Where exactly is this New England border? I can never recall seeing any signs that read "welcome to New England." The dictionary does not define regions by the way, states and the federal government do. The Tri-state are is more than economic. When you people say that, you imply that New England is cultural or even a separate nation. Maybe you people up in Hartford may feel that way and that's you, but down here, we are what we are. Attitudes like your sis why we almost feel like we should be a separate state. Your clear bias is what fuels this discussion. Maybe if you ever lived in the 203, you would see things very differently. Living up north by MA seems to only give you one view of the state. For anyone reading this, it should be clear that you New England fundamentalists are aways at work in spreading your propaganda. Man, your desperation is psychotic.-- 71.235.81.39 13:23, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I want the part about "from a statistical and economic standpoint..." crap about CT being in the NYC area taken out. That is BS and propaganda. If you want to put that it, then ADD "geographic and cultural" to it. Those are the prime reasons that CT is in the NYC area not a part of this New England fantasy. The 1st paragrah assumes that CT is somehow in bed with New England like the areas surrounding Boston. CT is to New England like other states are to their neighbors, of which CT only borders two New England states and our largest border is with NY. I will change it since Boston people seem to be at work to spraed false ideas about CT and make it appear as if we are 'down' with them when we are in fact down with NYC.-- 71.235.81.32 16:01, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
You say "sorry, but Connecticut has always been part of New England. Furthermore, much of the state (i.e., beyond Fairfield County and parts of Litchfield County) is strongly aligned with the rest of New England, not only geographically, but also culturally and economically," but I AM LIVING HERE, so I know a lot better than some dude in Boston assuming things. I will tell you yet again, New Haven County is down with New York as it is on the Metro-North line, two lines in fact. I really wish you people would stop telling these stories. Boston/New England is not on our minds. Now the parts of CT that border MA is down with Boston/New England, but the part that borders RI seems to go both ways. For you to think that CT, a place right next to the #1 city in AMerica would be concerned with a tiny, far away city like Boston is flat out crazy! This is why when you New Englanders come down here, you make sure you wear your Boston sports team gear because we have on our NY/NJ sports team gear.
You may not like the realities and you may desparatly need CT in your realm, but it is not happening, no matter what you write or delete. A friend of mine just came back from Cleaveland. When asked where he was from, he said the New York area. At other times he said CT, but the people associated it with New York and not wimpy and lame New England.-- 71.235.81.32 19:23, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Wow- get over it —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
192.104.254.82 (
talk)
22:06, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
The map purporting to show Connecticut from 1636 to 1776 shows Windsor, Hartford and Wethersfield on the eastern side of the Connecticut River. They are on the western side. FAMiniter ( talk) 18:52, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
at one point, was connecticut locations by per capita income its own page? There are/were a lot of references in this article that now are self-referenced back to the same section. i've removed two, but there may be more hidden. Clown ( talk) 09:25, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
"Southwestern Connecticut is part of your mom's boobs" I'm not from the USA, so I wouldn't know what was supposed to be written.. but certainly not "your mom's boobs". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.130.209.58 ( talk) 21:11, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
I've tried to cut this section down, but the second paragraph, in particular, is still rather poor. Considering that there's a separate main article listing all notable residents, can we reach consensus on who should be included in this section of this article? For example, IP users have been adding Triple H, but I don't believe this professional wrestler is of sufficient stature to warrant inclusion here. But what standard should be used? Qqqqqq ( talk) 05:27, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Paul Michael Levesque A.K.A Triple H is a FAMOUS WWE superstar therefore I recommend keeping Triple H in the famous residents section come on he is a 13 time champion that is the second most he should be in this list. Thank You —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.57.252.99 ( talk) 20:23, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Well it depends if Paul Michael Levesque A.K.A Triple H probably isn't really important in connecticut unless they watch WWE so you are probably right and I didn't see the list of people from connecticut which he was included in. Sorry for my editing and Thank You
The paragraph for Noah Webster claims that the "Blue Backed Speller" is now known as "Webster's Dictionary." In fact, the dictionary was a separate project. The Blue Backed Speller was just a spelling book, not a dictionary. I'll let someone else figure out the best way to edit the article to reflect the facts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.9.227.245 ( talk) 00:20, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
It's the quote regarding Puerto Ricans being regarded as most Latinos in the state and living in urban areas in the state. It's a broad and misleading statement. There are many cities in Connecticut with low Puerto Rican populations. While they do much up a significant proportion of Latinos, it's not appropriate to claim they're most and even that percentage is decreasing. Tom Nyj0127 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:22, 14 September 2009 (UTC).
Join today!-- Pharos ( talk) 00:23, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
I have added a citation to my addition to the introduction to the article- with per capita incomes of $16,393 and $13,428, respectively, Hartford and New Haven (to name only two of Connecticut's deeply impoverished cities) are indeed much poorer than the least wealthy state, Mississippi, at $36,338. I feel this information deserves a position of greater prominence in the article as these cities' metropolitan areas make up nearly half of the state's population. 72.79.218.180 ( talk) 10:01, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
Coming from one of those areas myself, I found the introduction to be extremely biased and misleading in its original form. While all states and nations have areas of higher and lower income, it must at least deserve mention that the fourth wealthiest state in the union is home to the city with one of the highest rates of poverty (as of the last census, the second highest in the nation). To ignore this disparity is irresponsible when trying to present a balanced picture of the state's economy. How could this constitute pov any more than the original description, which perpetuates the myth of a completely prosperous Connecticut at the expense of accuracy? 72.79.218.180 ( talk) 10:36, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for being condescending! In fact, I'm well aware that similar issues exist in, for example, New Jersey, another state which ranks highly on prosperity indexes, but which is home to poor cities such as Camden, or Qatar, for whom a grossly inflated per capita GDP is mentioned prominently early in its article, but not, say, in Maryland, which ranks as the wealthiest state in the union, and does not have cities with comparable poverty rates, yet manages to have a much less glowing article than any of the others I have mentioned. So, I suppose we agree: there are still many distorted facts to be corrected. 72.79.218.180 ( talk) 11:05, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
connecticut is A raelly small state but it still has lots of countrys. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
68.118.203.165 (
talk)
23:37, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
The link to the visitor's center for Wethersfield is interesting, but has to be weighed as a self-promotional claim by that town. It's likely that there are reliable sources to provide in its stead. Tedickey ( talk) 15:09, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Per section title "professional", these entries are out of place. Tedickey ( talk) 08:10, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
At the present time, the percentages in the Religion section add up to 108% — with only 14 options, this is too much for a rounding error. At the same time, we have a bit of an overlap: for example, Assembly of God is Pentecostal, and Pentecostals, Presbyterians, and UCC are all types of Protestants, as are Church of Christ by most accounts. If we merge them and the non-denominational (nobody uses this phrase except for Protestants) into the general Protestant category, we'll have 100%. Nyttend ( talk) 20:04, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
I don't understand the significance of the discussion on tax on out-of-state income. Every US state with an income tax that I am aware of has a similar policy for its residents, as does the US federal government for US residents' foreign income. I suggest this discussion be removed. ( 97.131.60.115 ( talk) 21:36, 19 February 2012 (UTC))
no mention of it's policy/repeal status? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.173.119.144 ( talk) 04:17, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
I noted that the article has a paragraph in the geography section which states "Although Connecticut has a long maritime history, and a reputation based on that history, Connecticut has no direct access to the sea. The jurisdiction of New York actually extends east at Fishers Island, where New York shares a sea border with Rhode Island dividing Narragansett Bay. Although Connecticut has easy access to the Atlantic, between Long Island Sound and Block Island Sound, Connecticut has no direct ocean coast."
I feel that the first sentance is a little misleading. Connecticut does infact have direct access to the sea. It may not have coastline or land directly on the ocean as defined by NOAA, but it does have shoreline and a means to get to the sea. If you take a boat due southeast from Mystic, you'll be on the open ocean.
The rest of the above paragraph is true in that you cross the jurisdictions of New York or Rhode Island, but the fact remains that you can go directly from Connecticut to the sea. It just seems to be contradicting itself by saying it has no access but then it has easy access. I propose changing this to "Although Connecticut has easy access to the Atlantic and a long maritime history with a reputation based on that history, Connecticut has no coastline, only shoreline bounded by New York and Rhode Island's borders at sea." and removing the last sentence.
Any other thoughts on this? Dbroer ( talk) 15:48, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
I have been reading about unreported debts and national/federal pension debts and Connecticut is one of the worst situations. I thought it valuable info to add a line referencing it especially since it seemed relevant and timely with the "fiscal cliff" discussions going on right now. I'm open to revisions or placing this information elsewhere on the page or on another CT page entirely. Let me know what you think. StickerMug ( talk) 21:03, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
Looking at the history of the article, there has been dispute about whether to include news about the school shooting on December 14 2012 in the article. As much as Wikipedia is not wikinews, given that this is what people all over the world will be associating Connecticut with at the current time, surely the event merits at least a brief mention in the article? ACEOREVIVED ( talk) 00:17, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Well perhaps not as I now see the article about Newtown does have information about this event. ACEOREVIVED ( talk) 00:24, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Disagree. While it is true that the incident is what people all over the world will be associating Connecticut with at the current time, the shooting in Connecticut, as in other places, are independent incidents. The shooting incidents in Aurora, CO, and Tucson, AZ, are associated with the alleged guilty parties, but not with the location. When the theater is reopened, should the advertisement read "Welcome to the Century Theater Grand Opening, Home of the James Eagan Holmes shooting."? We need to remember the incidents, but the time comes quickly when the location should cease to suffer for what happened. Continuing to mention the Newtown incident every time Connecticut is remembered, will permanently associate Connecticut with the Newtown incident, and minimize the incident itself. Davjohn ( talk) 03:08, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
The article should contain content related to the act that creates a "Powered Flight Day" in the state. Any reason for removing this content?
In the "Political Office" section we have:
I don't have time to count all the ways that is false, and i think i am going to blank the section and start from scratch instead of trying to patch it. Hopefully i'll have something true, but incomplete, before long, but if you can offer such a starting point faster than i can, i expect to take advantage of your work, in the classic Wiki fashion.
--
Jerzy•
t
03:59, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
Well. I think i was fooled by the gov't section of Connecticut, which says
where what needs to be said is closer to
My goal was to clean up the coverage nomination and ballot procedures, but the adjacent sections also had problems. I think some of what i saved (& immediately reverted away) may help improve one or the other of the two pages (the accompanying article and one i've linked to twice above). And i may finish the nomination & ballot material quickly. But i need to at least visit
WP: WikiProject Connecticut soon, and see if anyone else is thinking about a less overlapping approach to at least these two pages.
--
Jerzy•
t
06:36, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
Connecticut has long been famous as the only state in the union having 3 official nicknames. While growing up in Connecticut during the 1950s - 1970s we were taught that Connecticut had three official nicknames: "The Constitution State", "The Nutmeg State", and "The Charter Oak State". Nutmegger is as close to a nickname for residents as Connecticut has ever had. It may not have been legislated as official, it has been accepted by the people dating to before the War of 1812. Davjohn ( talk) 03:08, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
The ref for the demonym Connecticution links to Meriam Webster Opendictionary. This is a user submitted dictionary, and does not carry the weight as the normal m-w dictionary does. See Wikipedia:Verifiability#Sources_that_are_usually_not_reliable — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.28.19.43 ( talk) 23:30, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
As of mid-May, noting the alerts on missing citations and need to expand the history section, I have done so, relying in part on the "History of Connecticut" Wikipedia page to create matching subsections. There is still much work to be done on this section -- major periods lack chronologies, including Civil-War reconstruction era, roaring 20s/Depression, and Civil Rights era.
Casoulman ( talk) 16:35, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
As of mid-May, in an attempt to address the alert on improper inclusion of some people on the Famous Residents list, I have removed some whose careers did not match those of others while ensuring they were included on the Wikipedia page "list of people from Connecticut," which is a more appropriate page for their names. Several more are borderline -- namely Michael Bolton, Phil Donahue, Mia Farrow, Florence Griswold, Henry Lee, Patty LuPone, John Mayer, Marlo Thomas, and Mo Vaughn -- but I've left them intact as others clearly felt strongly enough to include them, and they have a record of excellence in their fields if not quite to match achievements or legacies of others on the list. I have no issues with anyone reviewing my edits and reinstating some that were listed; but ask that their comparative achievements be given full consideration before doing so.
Casoulman ( talk) 19:11, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
The state of Connecticut website and its publications like the Connecticut State Register and Manual list three census taken prior to the US national census in 1790. The years and populations listed are
1756: 130,612
1774: 197,910
1782: 208,850
I have no idea how that data could be put into the table. Here are some sources:
http://vvv.sots.state.ct.us/RegisterManual/SectionVII/Population1756.htm
http://www.ct.gov/ecd/cwp/view.asp?a=1106&q=250670
AJPEG ( talk) 08:05, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
I contend the edits recently made the IP that removes New England from the lead. Yes, Connecticut is very closely related to NY, and the lead says that already, but there's no doubt that it's part of New England and it always has been considered a New England state. It retains many characteristics of a New England state, such as the heavy emphasis on towns. As it stands now, the lead doesn't mention New England at all, and that seems like an odd omission. Scarlettail ( talk) 01:23, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
The article was better written months ago when it had a better compromise between CT being in metro NYC vs New England. This article reads like New England/Boston propaganda and Boston desperation to put CT in it's fold. Allow me to make the case for CT in NYC Tri-state and not NE.
CT is mostly surrounded by NY - more so than any other state. CT is in metro NYC which is a REAL region, as opposed to New England, which is more of a name CT get's NYC and NJ TV stations and media as it's LOCAL channels - ZERO from Boston or NE. CT's transportation system is designed around NYC NY Police patrol CT Boston is light years away from CT No part of CT is in the Boston metro region CT is as much NE as West VA is the south
So the bottom line is, the emphasis on CT has to be that it is in the metro NYC region first, New England second. These are the facts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.24.74.10 ( talk) 23:01, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 5 external links on
Connecticut. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 20:23, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 3 external links on
Connecticut. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 22:37, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 5 external links on
Connecticut. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 09:12, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Connecticut. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 08:28, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
There has been lots of vandalism recently. I think we should 'semi-protect' this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.251.52.170 ( talk) 16:10, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Connecticut. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 08:28, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
There has been lots of vandalism recently. I think we should 'semi-protect' this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.251.52.170 ( talk) 16:10, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Not done: Empty edit request.
st170e
talk
16:06, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on Connecticut. 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:
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 18:14, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 17 external links on Connecticut. 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:
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 18:13, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
I feel like this article has the materials to earn GA criteria with its citations, readbility and style of writing. Anyone want to go forward and submit it for a GA nom? If not, I can go ahead and take the charge. Twwalter ( talk) 20:00, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
Shouldn't there be a section in Demographics that lists the 10 largest cities/towns in Connecticut with their population and location? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.87.72.14 ( talk) 05:47, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
I've never heard of the Southwest/Fairfield area NOT being considered part of New England, so I'm not sure why the sentence in the intro regarding the North and East being "New England" is necessary/accurate. FWIW, the New England article designates the entirety of the six states. 23.25.224.97 ( talk) 17:52, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe Connecticut is the southernmost of the Mid-Atlantic states by any estimation. According to the Mid-Atlantic states article, it isn't even considered a part of the region except on occasion in terms of climate, and even then it is far from the southernmost state in the region. Dienekes117 ( talk) 01:23, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 11 external links on Connecticut. 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:
When 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:35, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 13 external links on Connecticut. 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:
When 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:31, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Connecticut. 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
https://www.harrietbeecherstowecenter.org/hbs/When 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:46, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
One section of the article says of the nickname Constitution State "The origin of this nickname is uncertain, but it likely comes from Connecticut's pivotal role in the federal constitutional convention of 1787...."
Later the article says "Connecticut's official nickname is 'The Constitution State', adopted in 1959 and based on its colonial constitution of 1638–1639 which was the first in America and, arguably, the world."
These two statements seem to contradict each other.
Venango ( talk) 11:34, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
One section of the article says a small percentage of the population is "Scotch-Irish". I believe the term should be "Scots-Irish".
Pages 8 and 9 of the 1987 book "Our Line" by Kenton McElhattan say this: "People referring to their ancestry as Scotch-Irish will have a different connotation of the meaning in Scotland than in this country. The word Scotch to people in Scotland infers a reference to whiskey. When American's refer to their ancestry as part Scotch, then the Scot will assume they are making some reference to whiskey. The proper word is Scot, Scottish, or Scotsman, not Scotch".
Venango ( talk) 23:20, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Information to be added or removed: I propose adding the below text to the education section of the page:
Connecticut ranked third in the nation for educational performance, according to Education Week’s Quality Counts 2018 report. It earned an overall score of 83.5 out of 100 points and a grade of B. By comparison, the nation received a score of 75.2 or a C.
Connecticut posted a B-plus in the Chance-for-Success category, ranking fourth on factors that contribute to a person’s success both within and outside the K-12 education system. Connecticut received a mark of B-plus and finished fourth for School Finance. It ranked 12th with a grade of C on the K-12 Achievement Index.
Explanation of issue: I believe this text would enhance the page, adding information on the quality of the state's K-12 education which is not currently available on the page. I'm asking your consideration because I work for Education Week. I apologize if I've misformatted this or left out information you need to make a decision - I'm rather new at this.
References supporting change: this is the source I'd cite:
[6]
Csmithepe (
talk) 16:43, 11 February 2019 (UTC)Csmithepe
Done. Thank you once again. I will let other editors take it from here. ―
Matthew J. Long
-Talk-
☖
17:00, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Cite error: There are <ref group=State of CT Public Act Summary>
tags on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=State of CT Public Act Summary}}
template (see the
help page).
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (
link)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
The Supreme Court of CT ruled on 10/10/08 that same-sex marriages should be recognized in CT. This should be added to this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.69.137.7 ( talk) 00:35, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Apparently include a department of "mental retardation" according to the article. Unless I'm hilariously mistaken, no should object to my deletion of it.
--Dude, do not be stupid. Why don't you google first? There is a Department of Mental Retardation in CT, [ [1]].
The name has still not been changed as of 1/31/07, although the General Assembly may take the issue up this session. 71.235.204.17 16:35, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Changed officially 1st October '07 to Department of Developmental Services. I've amended the text. See http://www.ct.gov/dds/cwp/view.asp?Q=395946&A=2645 Rojomoke 11:07, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
According to the State Register of Connecticut ( http://www.sots.ct.gov/RegisterManual/SectionVII/towninfo.htm#CITIES%20IN%20CONNECTICUT%20WITH%20DATE%20OF%20INCORPORATION), there are only 21 cities in Connecticut. This includes the 19 merged city-towns, and the two cities (Groton and Winsted) which are not merged.
They are: Ansonia, Bridgeport, Bristol, Danbury, Derby, Groton, Hartford, Meriden, Middletown, Milford, New Britain, New Haven, New London, Norwalk, Norwich, Shelton, Stamford, Torrington, Waterbury, West Haven, and Winsted (Winchester).
The remaining 150 MCDs are towns. There are a couple places in the government section which refer to towns as cities and cities as towns and vice versa. I'm not really sure what to do with this. Americans from outside New England will have trouble making the distinction between a city and a town in New England because city status is not the same thing.
Ultimately, it is factually incorrect to refer to Manchester and West Hartford as cities, even if they are urban areas. mikemillerdc 03:22, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
The new Principal cities section (which lists almost of the state's incorporated cities, but no towns, in declining order of population) seems "quaint" (at best). There are many towns in Connecticut that are larger than a bunch of the cities on the list (for example, consider Fairfield, Greenwich, Hamden, Manchester, and Stratford, all of which have 50,000 or more people). What's up?-- orlady 21:25, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Is this "Principal cities" section supposed to be a list of actual principal cities (as defined by the Office of Management and Budget) or just a list of towns with the biggest populations? -- Polaron | Talk 18:31, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
This has now been handled via List_of_municipalities_of_Connecticut_by_population, which combines all manner of municipalities into a single list, and allows the other lists to remain undisturbed, since they list those municipalities with particular forms of government. -- Yellowdesk 05:41, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
mikemillerdc 20:38, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
In an earlier edit, User:208.58.4.72 changed Lieberman to an Independent in the infobox (but not in the text). I'm not sure this is appropriate. While he won election as a representative of the "Connecticut for Lieberman" party, he has stated his intention to caucus with the democrats, and I am not sure he ever ended his political affiliation with the democratic party. mikemillerdc 19:22, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Officially, though, Joe Lieberman is an Independent, but caucuses most of the time with Democrats. However, that doesn't make him a Democrat since the party pretty much gave him the boot when he lost the primary to Ned Lamont. Being an Independent also reflects more accurately on Lieberman, as he has on numerous occasions crossed party lines on major issues, and has a very centrist viewpoint in the political arena. Ironically Lieberman has been receiving most of his support from Connecticut's Republicans and a large share of unaffiliated voters, while he has lost support among the state's Democrats.
I think that you should add the indian relations!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sum383 ( talk • contribs) .
The Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. states format has been updated to include a new Sports section, that covers collegiate sports, amateur sports, and non-team sports (such as hunting and fishing). Please feel free to add this new heading, and supply information about sports in Connecticut. Please see South_carolina#Sports_in_South_Carolina as an example. NorCalHistory 13:36, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
I have twice reverted part of an edit relating to proposed ferry service. I removed the italicized portion
The state has encouraged traffic reduction schemes, including rail use and ride-sharing[12], and it has proposed ferry service in Long Island Sound. [2]
The last edit summary was: (reinsert ferry service; the cited website states that the LIS Ferry Coalition was created by agencies of both CT and NY to promote ferries for transportation.)
The LIS Ferry coalition is a coordinating group. It was created by the New York Metropolitan Planning Council, and includes agencies from Connecticut and Rhode Island as well. It does not have the power to propose anything, just to pass on information and promote ideas.
The website does not seem to have a specific proposal involving ferry service for Connecticut. Were there to be such a proposal, it would be unlikely to be in the form of a traffic congestion mitigation proposal.
So, 1) just because LISFC likes something, does not mean that there is a proposal, 2) I could find no proposal, 3) LISFC is not an arm of the State of Connecticut, and 3) there is no source for the State of Connecticut having such a proposal. Jd2718 13:15, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
According to CBS News's "Making the Grade" map of U.S. states and some key educational statistics for each, Connecticut has a most unusual stat. The data claims that it has a "Student/Teacher Ratio: 2.6 to 1". That's two teachers for every five students, as opposed to the much more common rates of 12-20 to 1. Can this be correct? How would this be fiscally possible? I came to this article to see if Wikipedia had any suggestion, but I find that the only education discussed for this state is college/university level and boarding schools. I would think that such a remarkable ratio would indicate something worth citing about Connecticut's K-12 programs. Does anyone have any information on this subject? ~ Jeff Q (talk) 05:38, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
...redlinked, though this would make an inane separate article. Tagged "citation required" although the ext. link (Connecticut State Library) "Connecticut's "Southwick Jog" gives a much more sensible account than this Wikipedia article. I'd fix this myself, but the references system here is a cat's cardle. -- Wetman 05:20, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
I think it is best for it to be cut in diffrent articles. Fattdoggy 15:21, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
There is now a proposed WikiProject to deal with the state of Connecticut at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Connecticut. Any parties interested in taking part in such a project should indicate as much there, so that we can know if there is sufficient interest to create it. Thank you. Badbilltucker 16:52, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
The template being used for this article is wrong. This template should only be used for cities. Can you please use a template:Infobox state instead of template:Infobox city. Thank you! Furthermore, the request is based on the principal that the common denominator, per the new category UTC-5 demonstrates that cities generally have the state or province name. Take for example Ottawa which should redirect to Ottawa, Ontario and not vis-versa. This will help when categorizing cities. -- CyclePat 00:35, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm a newbie here, so apologies if this is in the wrong place or otherwise incomplete. When using Google Earth, if you look just southwest of Montauk, NY, in the Atlantic Ocean, you will see the Wikipedia dot for Connecticut. The coordinates are obviously incorrect. Can someone fix that, as I'm not sure where those erroneous coordinates come from. Thanks! Cdmcquee 03:54, 31 January 2007 (UTC)-- Cdmcquee 03:54, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
We may as well split this discussion into multiple articles, because it is longer than the real article about Connecticut. I feel the Connecticut article is the proper length.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.120.45.119 ( talk) 17:33, 10 February 2007
How come the article was change around? It read well without the New England reference in there. The New England article mention CT in teh NYC tri-state area was taken out also. It was perfect the way it was.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.235.81.39 ( talk) 19:36, 9 March 2007
Why no ESPN reference? MrM 05:39, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
"Connecticut is the most Italian-American state percentage-wise, just above Rhode Island." This statement is incorrect, Connecticut has the second highest percentage of Italian-Americans (18.6%) just behind Rhode Island (19%). Could someone please fix this? -DCR
The article says, regarding what do you call someone from Connecticut: "Nutmegger" is sometimes used, as is "Yankee."[13] The footnote takes you to the Connecticut State Library where there is no mention of the use of Yankee to denote a Connecticut resident. Perhaps "Yankee" should be omitted or another reference found? -- Ttommott 11:50, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
Comments requested on whether separate CDP articles for town centers are necessary. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Connecticut#Comments requested regarding CDP articles. -- Polaron | Talk 23:11, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
You know what's odd?
There's a full article on Economy of Connecticut in the Hebrew Wikipedia, but not here ... -- Amir E. Aharoni ( talk) 21:39, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
See reasoning at Template talk:Connecticut#All towns listing. Individual county templates were removed in favor of a state template that has been expanded to list all towns and boroughs. Comments are requested. -- Polaron | Talk 16:55, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Please do not return this information to the artilce without a citation.-- BirgitteSB 18:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
I thought that the state motto should have a source. If it already does, then just tell me. I just wanted to check with everybody before doing anything. If you look here, this explains how they came to the motto and their explantation. Thanks,
Conor69 ( talk) 10:16, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
Data from the Association of Religion Data Archives (ARDA) apparently contradicts the survey at the beginning of the religion section. But the ARDA data seems more accurate to me. The survey cited at the beginning of the religion section on the other hand switches between single denominations and groups of denominations all the time. Mk4711 ( talk) 16:15, 20 September 2008 (UTC) people there live it thug style —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.190.254.86 ( talk) 00:22, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm from the UK, so may well be missing something, but this looks odd to me:
"Fall months are mild, and bring foliage across the state in October and November."
Surely trees have foliage all summer as well! I'm assuming what's meant is fall colours, but it doesn't say so. 86.132.138.159 ( talk) 01:12, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
connecticuts state flower is the Mountain laurel. Bird is american robin.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.57.252.43 ( talk) 00:32, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
This one appears to be invalid - returns 404 not found message- need to either validate or remove Connecticut State Register & Manual http://www.sots.ct.gov/RegisterManual/regman.htm 209.16.117.50 ( talk) 21:19, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
According to the wiki entry, "Connecticut (pronounced /kəˈnɛtɪkət/; the second C is silent)" is the correct way to say the name of the state. However, I do pronounce the second 'C' in Connecticut, although the 'T' is obviously stressed. Maybe this is just because my family is filled with New Yorkers, but I thought I might as well bring it up. -- 68.109.116.107 17:15, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
Most people actually pronounce it Conn-en-i-cut, which is wrong, but everyone understands it nonetheless George kaplan 00:00, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Although I am native also, growing up I did try to pronounce it as it was spelled, but people either corrected me or said it in the common way. I would like to know the correct pronunciation myself. People in Missouri pronounce it Mis-surra, but I pronoun it Mis-surri. I am sure that is the case for a few other states as well. I still don't understand why Arkansas is not Ar-Kansas...-- 71.235.81.39 13:30, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm from Hartford County and the vast majority of people I know pronounce it Cuh-ned-i-cut. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.99.141.48 ( talk) 03:41, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
How come there are always exceptions or tri-state is in quotes as if it is some sort or lie or joke? In this case, they write: "From a statistical and economic perspective, southwestern Connecticut is part of the Tri-State Region." That line sounds like excuses are being made fro CT being in the NYC area and that it only exists from a "statistical"(who's statistics?) and economic(huh?) perspective. Who's perspective is this? It must be Boston's and New England supporters. That is not our perspective. We are a part of the Tri-state area because we are near NYC, get their media, transportation, share their culture(yes. try finding a New England culture. when something is happening in NYC, it is happening in CT, then is gets to the rest of the nation.), land, water and NYC is the hub of the Tri-state area as is the case with any major city.
It does not hurt to admit the truth. If you can, please stop trying to short-change us on this. Hartford says they are "the shining star of New England," so that should be good enough for you guys who like the New England thing. I like the addition, but it just seems as if it was put there to be there, but not put put forth with force. It is written from a POV as if the Tri-state should not or was not supposed to be. Boston (not bashing) is too far away and too small for them to have any influence on CT. They act like they own New England or something. They act as if because one part of what was 'theirs' should be reclaimed because it does not see Boston as a hub or de facto capital. Reality is reality. I have seen a HUGE influx of plates from New England down the 203 way, the like of which I have NEVER seen before. It is almost as if Boston took out an ad and paid New Englanders to move down here. No matter, like the Greeks and Romans going to Egypt, they ll have no choice but to adapt to the local (NYC area) culture.
I just hope that when you mention CT and the Tri-state area, you put as much definite statements as you do about Boston and New England. With them, there are no doubts about what they are. With us, it makes it appear as if you don't take it seirously and that we are really New Englanders pretending to be New Yorkers. When you are in Greenwich and you can literally walk across the street and be in NY , then you will begin to see that the imaginary line known as "New England" is fiction and was only good for the USA's colonial past between the Dutch and the English.-- 71.235.81.39 00:04, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
See, you double-talk a lot. You tell me to relax because New England is "just a place," but clearly in your mind it is more than just a place since you also mention my living 'within IT'S borders." Where exactly is this New England border? I can never recall seeing any signs that read "welcome to New England." The dictionary does not define regions by the way, states and the federal government do. The Tri-state are is more than economic. When you people say that, you imply that New England is cultural or even a separate nation. Maybe you people up in Hartford may feel that way and that's you, but down here, we are what we are. Attitudes like your sis why we almost feel like we should be a separate state. Your clear bias is what fuels this discussion. Maybe if you ever lived in the 203, you would see things very differently. Living up north by MA seems to only give you one view of the state. For anyone reading this, it should be clear that you New England fundamentalists are aways at work in spreading your propaganda. Man, your desperation is psychotic.-- 71.235.81.39 13:23, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I want the part about "from a statistical and economic standpoint..." crap about CT being in the NYC area taken out. That is BS and propaganda. If you want to put that it, then ADD "geographic and cultural" to it. Those are the prime reasons that CT is in the NYC area not a part of this New England fantasy. The 1st paragrah assumes that CT is somehow in bed with New England like the areas surrounding Boston. CT is to New England like other states are to their neighbors, of which CT only borders two New England states and our largest border is with NY. I will change it since Boston people seem to be at work to spraed false ideas about CT and make it appear as if we are 'down' with them when we are in fact down with NYC.-- 71.235.81.32 16:01, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
You say "sorry, but Connecticut has always been part of New England. Furthermore, much of the state (i.e., beyond Fairfield County and parts of Litchfield County) is strongly aligned with the rest of New England, not only geographically, but also culturally and economically," but I AM LIVING HERE, so I know a lot better than some dude in Boston assuming things. I will tell you yet again, New Haven County is down with New York as it is on the Metro-North line, two lines in fact. I really wish you people would stop telling these stories. Boston/New England is not on our minds. Now the parts of CT that border MA is down with Boston/New England, but the part that borders RI seems to go both ways. For you to think that CT, a place right next to the #1 city in AMerica would be concerned with a tiny, far away city like Boston is flat out crazy! This is why when you New Englanders come down here, you make sure you wear your Boston sports team gear because we have on our NY/NJ sports team gear.
You may not like the realities and you may desparatly need CT in your realm, but it is not happening, no matter what you write or delete. A friend of mine just came back from Cleaveland. When asked where he was from, he said the New York area. At other times he said CT, but the people associated it with New York and not wimpy and lame New England.-- 71.235.81.32 19:23, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Wow- get over it —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
192.104.254.82 (
talk)
22:06, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
The map purporting to show Connecticut from 1636 to 1776 shows Windsor, Hartford and Wethersfield on the eastern side of the Connecticut River. They are on the western side. FAMiniter ( talk) 18:52, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
at one point, was connecticut locations by per capita income its own page? There are/were a lot of references in this article that now are self-referenced back to the same section. i've removed two, but there may be more hidden. Clown ( talk) 09:25, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
"Southwestern Connecticut is part of your mom's boobs" I'm not from the USA, so I wouldn't know what was supposed to be written.. but certainly not "your mom's boobs". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.130.209.58 ( talk) 21:11, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
I've tried to cut this section down, but the second paragraph, in particular, is still rather poor. Considering that there's a separate main article listing all notable residents, can we reach consensus on who should be included in this section of this article? For example, IP users have been adding Triple H, but I don't believe this professional wrestler is of sufficient stature to warrant inclusion here. But what standard should be used? Qqqqqq ( talk) 05:27, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Paul Michael Levesque A.K.A Triple H is a FAMOUS WWE superstar therefore I recommend keeping Triple H in the famous residents section come on he is a 13 time champion that is the second most he should be in this list. Thank You —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.57.252.99 ( talk) 20:23, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Well it depends if Paul Michael Levesque A.K.A Triple H probably isn't really important in connecticut unless they watch WWE so you are probably right and I didn't see the list of people from connecticut which he was included in. Sorry for my editing and Thank You
The paragraph for Noah Webster claims that the "Blue Backed Speller" is now known as "Webster's Dictionary." In fact, the dictionary was a separate project. The Blue Backed Speller was just a spelling book, not a dictionary. I'll let someone else figure out the best way to edit the article to reflect the facts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.9.227.245 ( talk) 00:20, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
It's the quote regarding Puerto Ricans being regarded as most Latinos in the state and living in urban areas in the state. It's a broad and misleading statement. There are many cities in Connecticut with low Puerto Rican populations. While they do much up a significant proportion of Latinos, it's not appropriate to claim they're most and even that percentage is decreasing. Tom Nyj0127 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:22, 14 September 2009 (UTC).
Join today!-- Pharos ( talk) 00:23, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
I have added a citation to my addition to the introduction to the article- with per capita incomes of $16,393 and $13,428, respectively, Hartford and New Haven (to name only two of Connecticut's deeply impoverished cities) are indeed much poorer than the least wealthy state, Mississippi, at $36,338. I feel this information deserves a position of greater prominence in the article as these cities' metropolitan areas make up nearly half of the state's population. 72.79.218.180 ( talk) 10:01, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
Coming from one of those areas myself, I found the introduction to be extremely biased and misleading in its original form. While all states and nations have areas of higher and lower income, it must at least deserve mention that the fourth wealthiest state in the union is home to the city with one of the highest rates of poverty (as of the last census, the second highest in the nation). To ignore this disparity is irresponsible when trying to present a balanced picture of the state's economy. How could this constitute pov any more than the original description, which perpetuates the myth of a completely prosperous Connecticut at the expense of accuracy? 72.79.218.180 ( talk) 10:36, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for being condescending! In fact, I'm well aware that similar issues exist in, for example, New Jersey, another state which ranks highly on prosperity indexes, but which is home to poor cities such as Camden, or Qatar, for whom a grossly inflated per capita GDP is mentioned prominently early in its article, but not, say, in Maryland, which ranks as the wealthiest state in the union, and does not have cities with comparable poverty rates, yet manages to have a much less glowing article than any of the others I have mentioned. So, I suppose we agree: there are still many distorted facts to be corrected. 72.79.218.180 ( talk) 11:05, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
connecticut is A raelly small state but it still has lots of countrys. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
68.118.203.165 (
talk)
23:37, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
The link to the visitor's center for Wethersfield is interesting, but has to be weighed as a self-promotional claim by that town. It's likely that there are reliable sources to provide in its stead. Tedickey ( talk) 15:09, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Per section title "professional", these entries are out of place. Tedickey ( talk) 08:10, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
At the present time, the percentages in the Religion section add up to 108% — with only 14 options, this is too much for a rounding error. At the same time, we have a bit of an overlap: for example, Assembly of God is Pentecostal, and Pentecostals, Presbyterians, and UCC are all types of Protestants, as are Church of Christ by most accounts. If we merge them and the non-denominational (nobody uses this phrase except for Protestants) into the general Protestant category, we'll have 100%. Nyttend ( talk) 20:04, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
I don't understand the significance of the discussion on tax on out-of-state income. Every US state with an income tax that I am aware of has a similar policy for its residents, as does the US federal government for US residents' foreign income. I suggest this discussion be removed. ( 97.131.60.115 ( talk) 21:36, 19 February 2012 (UTC))
no mention of it's policy/repeal status? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.173.119.144 ( talk) 04:17, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
I noted that the article has a paragraph in the geography section which states "Although Connecticut has a long maritime history, and a reputation based on that history, Connecticut has no direct access to the sea. The jurisdiction of New York actually extends east at Fishers Island, where New York shares a sea border with Rhode Island dividing Narragansett Bay. Although Connecticut has easy access to the Atlantic, between Long Island Sound and Block Island Sound, Connecticut has no direct ocean coast."
I feel that the first sentance is a little misleading. Connecticut does infact have direct access to the sea. It may not have coastline or land directly on the ocean as defined by NOAA, but it does have shoreline and a means to get to the sea. If you take a boat due southeast from Mystic, you'll be on the open ocean.
The rest of the above paragraph is true in that you cross the jurisdictions of New York or Rhode Island, but the fact remains that you can go directly from Connecticut to the sea. It just seems to be contradicting itself by saying it has no access but then it has easy access. I propose changing this to "Although Connecticut has easy access to the Atlantic and a long maritime history with a reputation based on that history, Connecticut has no coastline, only shoreline bounded by New York and Rhode Island's borders at sea." and removing the last sentence.
Any other thoughts on this? Dbroer ( talk) 15:48, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
I have been reading about unreported debts and national/federal pension debts and Connecticut is one of the worst situations. I thought it valuable info to add a line referencing it especially since it seemed relevant and timely with the "fiscal cliff" discussions going on right now. I'm open to revisions or placing this information elsewhere on the page or on another CT page entirely. Let me know what you think. StickerMug ( talk) 21:03, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
Looking at the history of the article, there has been dispute about whether to include news about the school shooting on December 14 2012 in the article. As much as Wikipedia is not wikinews, given that this is what people all over the world will be associating Connecticut with at the current time, surely the event merits at least a brief mention in the article? ACEOREVIVED ( talk) 00:17, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Well perhaps not as I now see the article about Newtown does have information about this event. ACEOREVIVED ( talk) 00:24, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Disagree. While it is true that the incident is what people all over the world will be associating Connecticut with at the current time, the shooting in Connecticut, as in other places, are independent incidents. The shooting incidents in Aurora, CO, and Tucson, AZ, are associated with the alleged guilty parties, but not with the location. When the theater is reopened, should the advertisement read "Welcome to the Century Theater Grand Opening, Home of the James Eagan Holmes shooting."? We need to remember the incidents, but the time comes quickly when the location should cease to suffer for what happened. Continuing to mention the Newtown incident every time Connecticut is remembered, will permanently associate Connecticut with the Newtown incident, and minimize the incident itself. Davjohn ( talk) 03:08, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
The article should contain content related to the act that creates a "Powered Flight Day" in the state. Any reason for removing this content?
In the "Political Office" section we have:
I don't have time to count all the ways that is false, and i think i am going to blank the section and start from scratch instead of trying to patch it. Hopefully i'll have something true, but incomplete, before long, but if you can offer such a starting point faster than i can, i expect to take advantage of your work, in the classic Wiki fashion.
--
Jerzy•
t
03:59, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
Well. I think i was fooled by the gov't section of Connecticut, which says
where what needs to be said is closer to
My goal was to clean up the coverage nomination and ballot procedures, but the adjacent sections also had problems. I think some of what i saved (& immediately reverted away) may help improve one or the other of the two pages (the accompanying article and one i've linked to twice above). And i may finish the nomination & ballot material quickly. But i need to at least visit
WP: WikiProject Connecticut soon, and see if anyone else is thinking about a less overlapping approach to at least these two pages.
--
Jerzy•
t
06:36, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
Connecticut has long been famous as the only state in the union having 3 official nicknames. While growing up in Connecticut during the 1950s - 1970s we were taught that Connecticut had three official nicknames: "The Constitution State", "The Nutmeg State", and "The Charter Oak State". Nutmegger is as close to a nickname for residents as Connecticut has ever had. It may not have been legislated as official, it has been accepted by the people dating to before the War of 1812. Davjohn ( talk) 03:08, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
The ref for the demonym Connecticution links to Meriam Webster Opendictionary. This is a user submitted dictionary, and does not carry the weight as the normal m-w dictionary does. See Wikipedia:Verifiability#Sources_that_are_usually_not_reliable — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.28.19.43 ( talk) 23:30, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
As of mid-May, noting the alerts on missing citations and need to expand the history section, I have done so, relying in part on the "History of Connecticut" Wikipedia page to create matching subsections. There is still much work to be done on this section -- major periods lack chronologies, including Civil-War reconstruction era, roaring 20s/Depression, and Civil Rights era.
Casoulman ( talk) 16:35, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
As of mid-May, in an attempt to address the alert on improper inclusion of some people on the Famous Residents list, I have removed some whose careers did not match those of others while ensuring they were included on the Wikipedia page "list of people from Connecticut," which is a more appropriate page for their names. Several more are borderline -- namely Michael Bolton, Phil Donahue, Mia Farrow, Florence Griswold, Henry Lee, Patty LuPone, John Mayer, Marlo Thomas, and Mo Vaughn -- but I've left them intact as others clearly felt strongly enough to include them, and they have a record of excellence in their fields if not quite to match achievements or legacies of others on the list. I have no issues with anyone reviewing my edits and reinstating some that were listed; but ask that their comparative achievements be given full consideration before doing so.
Casoulman ( talk) 19:11, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
The state of Connecticut website and its publications like the Connecticut State Register and Manual list three census taken prior to the US national census in 1790. The years and populations listed are
1756: 130,612
1774: 197,910
1782: 208,850
I have no idea how that data could be put into the table. Here are some sources:
http://vvv.sots.state.ct.us/RegisterManual/SectionVII/Population1756.htm
http://www.ct.gov/ecd/cwp/view.asp?a=1106&q=250670
AJPEG ( talk) 08:05, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
I contend the edits recently made the IP that removes New England from the lead. Yes, Connecticut is very closely related to NY, and the lead says that already, but there's no doubt that it's part of New England and it always has been considered a New England state. It retains many characteristics of a New England state, such as the heavy emphasis on towns. As it stands now, the lead doesn't mention New England at all, and that seems like an odd omission. Scarlettail ( talk) 01:23, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
The article was better written months ago when it had a better compromise between CT being in metro NYC vs New England. This article reads like New England/Boston propaganda and Boston desperation to put CT in it's fold. Allow me to make the case for CT in NYC Tri-state and not NE.
CT is mostly surrounded by NY - more so than any other state. CT is in metro NYC which is a REAL region, as opposed to New England, which is more of a name CT get's NYC and NJ TV stations and media as it's LOCAL channels - ZERO from Boston or NE. CT's transportation system is designed around NYC NY Police patrol CT Boston is light years away from CT No part of CT is in the Boston metro region CT is as much NE as West VA is the south
So the bottom line is, the emphasis on CT has to be that it is in the metro NYC region first, New England second. These are the facts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.24.74.10 ( talk) 23:01, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 5 external links on
Connecticut. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 20:23, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 3 external links on
Connecticut. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 22:37, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 5 external links on
Connecticut. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 09:12, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Connecticut. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 08:28, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
There has been lots of vandalism recently. I think we should 'semi-protect' this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.251.52.170 ( talk) 16:10, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Connecticut. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 08:28, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
There has been lots of vandalism recently. I think we should 'semi-protect' this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.251.52.170 ( talk) 16:10, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Not done: Empty edit request.
st170e
talk
16:06, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on Connecticut. 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:
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 18:14, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 17 external links on Connecticut. 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:
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 18:13, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
I feel like this article has the materials to earn GA criteria with its citations, readbility and style of writing. Anyone want to go forward and submit it for a GA nom? If not, I can go ahead and take the charge. Twwalter ( talk) 20:00, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
Shouldn't there be a section in Demographics that lists the 10 largest cities/towns in Connecticut with their population and location? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.87.72.14 ( talk) 05:47, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
I've never heard of the Southwest/Fairfield area NOT being considered part of New England, so I'm not sure why the sentence in the intro regarding the North and East being "New England" is necessary/accurate. FWIW, the New England article designates the entirety of the six states. 23.25.224.97 ( talk) 17:52, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe Connecticut is the southernmost of the Mid-Atlantic states by any estimation. According to the Mid-Atlantic states article, it isn't even considered a part of the region except on occasion in terms of climate, and even then it is far from the southernmost state in the region. Dienekes117 ( talk) 01:23, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 11 external links on Connecticut. 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:
When 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:35, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 13 external links on Connecticut. 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:
When 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:31, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Connecticut. 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
https://www.harrietbeecherstowecenter.org/hbs/When 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:46, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
One section of the article says of the nickname Constitution State "The origin of this nickname is uncertain, but it likely comes from Connecticut's pivotal role in the federal constitutional convention of 1787...."
Later the article says "Connecticut's official nickname is 'The Constitution State', adopted in 1959 and based on its colonial constitution of 1638–1639 which was the first in America and, arguably, the world."
These two statements seem to contradict each other.
Venango ( talk) 11:34, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
One section of the article says a small percentage of the population is "Scotch-Irish". I believe the term should be "Scots-Irish".
Pages 8 and 9 of the 1987 book "Our Line" by Kenton McElhattan say this: "People referring to their ancestry as Scotch-Irish will have a different connotation of the meaning in Scotland than in this country. The word Scotch to people in Scotland infers a reference to whiskey. When American's refer to their ancestry as part Scotch, then the Scot will assume they are making some reference to whiskey. The proper word is Scot, Scottish, or Scotsman, not Scotch".
Venango ( talk) 23:20, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Information to be added or removed: I propose adding the below text to the education section of the page:
Connecticut ranked third in the nation for educational performance, according to Education Week’s Quality Counts 2018 report. It earned an overall score of 83.5 out of 100 points and a grade of B. By comparison, the nation received a score of 75.2 or a C.
Connecticut posted a B-plus in the Chance-for-Success category, ranking fourth on factors that contribute to a person’s success both within and outside the K-12 education system. Connecticut received a mark of B-plus and finished fourth for School Finance. It ranked 12th with a grade of C on the K-12 Achievement Index.
Explanation of issue: I believe this text would enhance the page, adding information on the quality of the state's K-12 education which is not currently available on the page. I'm asking your consideration because I work for Education Week. I apologize if I've misformatted this or left out information you need to make a decision - I'm rather new at this.
References supporting change: this is the source I'd cite:
[6]
Csmithepe (
talk) 16:43, 11 February 2019 (UTC)Csmithepe
Done. Thank you once again. I will let other editors take it from here. ―
Matthew J. Long
-Talk-
☖
17:00, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Cite error: There are <ref group=State of CT Public Act Summary>
tags on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=State of CT Public Act Summary}}
template (see the
help page).
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (
link)