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 |
Maybe we should discuss this? I'm sure we can find reliable sources on both sides, since he has been affiliated both as Independent and as Democrat. The question is how do we list him? The template doc does not provide guidance. I think he should be listed as Independent, because his position in the infobox is "Senator," and he was an Independent at the time he was elected. Kendall-K1 ( talk) 12:24, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
Note that at Talk:Bernie Sanders#Should Bernie be listed as a Democrat now?, it was concluded that "In view of the sources provided, I would be content to list him as an independent [as Vermont's senator], so long as U.S. Senate—Party Division in the Senate, 1789-Present and Sanders' website are cited as sources." There has been no subsequent debate to the contrary. User:HopsonRoad 19:48, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
He did appear on the Democratic primary ballot in Vermont for the Senate in both 2006 and 2012, winning their primary, but he declined the nomination both times so he could run as an independent.
When Vermont Senator Jim Jeffords, a Republican who turned independent in his last term, announced that he was stepping down in 2006, Sanders jumped into a race that a number of Democrats would have liked to run. He won the Democratic primary and then declined the nomination, mounting an audacious independent run that was not supposed to be easy.
@ Archwayh:, thank you for recognizing my good faith in this matter, as I recognize yours. I further appreciate your desire to educate the English-speaking world about the excellent people that my state sends to Congress. What I've been trying to do is to educate the readership on the oddities of American politics, which sometime run counter-intuitive to what appears to be obvious—in this instance, Sanders being listed as (I) in the US Senate, when he is running for president as (D)! Cheers, User:HopsonRoad 14:21, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
But that's my point, entirely. Sanders represents Vermont in the Senate and there he is listed as an Independent. His status, as such, affects his role in office. It's with the permission of the Democrats, not by right of being elected under the party banner, that he caucuses with them. User:HopsonRoad 18:43, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
I still think he should be listed (I) on this page, because his listing here is as Senator from Vermont, and he was elected to the Senate as an Independent. And it's not just the Senate that lists him that way, so do all the major vote tracking organizations like Open Congress and Votesmart. Kendall-K1 ( talk) 03:59, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
This is a question that will persist until Bernie Sanders is elected president or until the next senatorial election. It will remain puzzling to new editors who drop by how this apparent contradiction can exist and it will be their good-faith desire to fix what is apparently a mistake, although it isn't one—it's the fallout of an unusual circumstance where a politician has one status in the Senate and another on the national stage. Sanders has steadfastly allowed his name to entered in the Democratic primaries for Senate in Vermont, with the agreement that he would run as an Independent in the national election cycle—this eliminates there being a different Democratic candidate to split the vote. By the same token, it would be impossible to run as an Independent presidential candidate at the national level, unless he had eliminated a Democratic rival. That's why he is a Democrat at this moment, although at heart he is a "democratic socialist." It will be interesting to see, if he runs for the Senate again, whether he repeats his past approach.
He remains properly listed as an (I) here and a (D) at Bernie Sanders. — User:HopsonRoad 21:12, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
This edit by Sigehelmus adds a source from Vermont Public Radio (VPR) about the local pronunciation of "Vermont", which is good. Sieghelmus also adds an IPA pronunciation, but the VPR show transcript contains no IPA symbols, so it isn't clear who created the IPA representation. The symbols used do not appear in the page where the tool tip leads, Help:IPA for English, so very few people will be able to make use of the IPA representation, or be able to verify that it actually represents the same pronunciation described by VPR. Jc3s5h ( talk) 16:50, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
I've always heard it as spoken here for NA English. Some old timers that I've heard, pronounced it "VUH-mont". User:HopsonRoad 02:23, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
I'm the editor who first inserted the IPA transcription and also the editor who recently decided to remove it. Months ago, I was under the impression that there was a more or less uniform "Vermont accent." My studies show that this is no longer true. I recently created the article Western New England English where I described how linguist Charles Boberg differentiates a Rutland accent from a Burlington accent. And neither of these even includes the now-dying r-less Vermont accent that once prevailed before the mid-1900s (i.e. "vuh-mont"). (Plus, all my actual Vermont friends just pronounce Vermont in a General American way; something like [vɚˈmɑ̈nʔ], dropping the T at the end like most other Americans.) I now agree with User:HopsonRoad; there is no one uniform local "Vermont" way to pronounce the word, so let's remove the one we have. Wolfdog ( talk) 18:24, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for your perseverance on this topic, Sigehelmus. Two cautions come to mind: 1. The map in Nagy and Roberts (P. 53), showing the east-west divide of language influences (along the spine of the Green Mountains), and 2. the explicit mention that the pronunciation of the state as "/vərmɑ̃ʔ/" is most commonly found among older, male, rural speakers, but still persists in rural areas among speakers of all ages.
I would support a note saying something like, "Among rural Vermonters, especially in the western side of the state, the use of the glottal stop can render the name of the state as "/vərmɑ̃ʔ/," causing the "t" on the end not to be heard." Cheers, User:HopsonRoad 23:14, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Sigehelmus, I don't concur with the statement, "Often pronounced /vərmɒ̃ʔ/ by locals of all ages, especially in rural areas of the state," because it implies that is a common pronunciation in the state. It appears to be found in rural parts of the western side of the state, only. That's why I chose the wording, "Often pronounced /vərmɒ̃ʔ/ in rural areas of the state." Furthermore, "by locals of all ages" doesn't add information. It's clear that we're speaking of Vermont residents, whom it would be condescending to term a "local;" mention of age is only significant if there were something to discriminate among the ages, which according to the source, there isn't. I also find it questionable to use the word "often" since the source doesn't explain the penetration of that manner of speaking among the general populace—it only discusses the pattern of speech among those who speak in that manner. Cheers, User:HopsonRoad 20:26, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
Sigehelmus has gathered enough material to have a brief section on "Vermont dialect." The question is, where would it best fit—under "Demographics" (which is mostly about census data on ethnic background) or "Culture" (which is mostly about high culture)? Thoughts on the subject? User:HopsonRoad 23:25, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
I have drafted a sub-paragraph on Vermont dialects, which one can view (for the time-being) in my sandbox. If there's no objection, I plan to drop it into the Demographics section. User:HopsonRoad 15:27, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
The typographic arrangement of our motto makes AND to like like NO. Remember, the actual flag is not a tablet screen, so we should type it more distinctly. Politicians are aware of the issue but NO UNITY brings more votes, even if it harms our beloved state! Add more data! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:587:4101:8C00:B8AD:1307:BAB7:BBB2 ( talk) 11:52, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
An editor has added content denoting the national origins of the Vermont population using a census search tool. Unfortunately, this appears to represent original research and not information from a reliable source, so I have commented it out, pending a discussion here. Likewise the editor added an assertion about people's national self identification with a long list of references that make it difficult to discern which reference actually supported the assertion and whether the assertion pertained specifically to Vermonters, which should be the focus of this article. I have invited the editor to discuss the matter, here. User:HopsonRoad 00:50, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Vermont. 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 User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*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.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 16:25, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 12 external links on Vermont. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20100907/NEWS02/100906009/Burlington-high-rise-gets-facelift{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.ncsl.org/programs/fiscal/balbuda.htm{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.timesdaily.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=NEWS&template=wiki&text=VermontWhen 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) 19:32, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
See discussion at Talk:Vermont/Archive 3. Sincerely, User:HopsonRoad 21:17, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Vermont. 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) 15:47, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Vermont. 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) 20:28, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
I reverted an edit without an Edit Summary (hit the wrong key, sorry) - it concerned the difference between the small population means that Vermont is "ahead only of Wyoming" or "only ahead of Wyoming".
The first wording is correct but it's easy to misread or be confused, so on second thought I'm going to remove the "only" which isn't needed anyway. - DavidWBrooks ( talk) 17:33, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Vermont. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.sphere.com/2009/12/04/whats-the-greenest-place-in-america-hint-it-has-8-million-peo/?icid=main%7Chtmlws-main-n%7Cdl1%7Clink5%7Chttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.sphere.com%2F2009%2F12%2F04%2Fwhats-the-greenest-place-in-america-hint-it-has-8-million-peo%2F{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20120330/NEWS03/120330011/President-Obama-addresses-crowd-at-UVM-in-BurlingtonWhen 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) 00:43, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Vermont. 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) 16:11, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
An IP editor and I have different ideas about which verbiage is more appropriate for the article:
Please discuss the relative merits of each and express your preference, below. Sincerely, User:HopsonRoad 16:12, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
The lead currently only reflects the history of the state up to its admission to the United States. It needs additional material to reflect the content of the article, better. HopsonRoad ( talk) 12:05, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
Scandal scenes were shot in Vermont too Khesia hopper7 ( talk) 20:58, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
Not a single mention of it, despite being the vast majority of visitors to the state. Really? 70.29.99.162 ( talk) 03:33, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
Should Sanders be labelled as a Democrat in the infobox? As per DNC rules he needs to formally join the party to run for the nomination. - Bokmanrocks01 ( talk) 21:14, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
@ DavidWBrooks, Servicio, Castncoot, Aboideau, Slightsmile, Rickscully, PootisHeavy, Jmertel23, Sjj109, Patrickneil, Rossdegenstein, and Cemateo: One or more IP editors has deleted an analysis of the effect of global warming on the state's ski industry in the state with this edit. Perhaps other editors can weigh in about whether the passage should stay. Sincerely, HopsonRoad ( talk) 02:25, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
Done I hope that the following text addresses the suggestions, above: "The effects of global warming have been predicted to shorten the length of the ski season across Vermont, which would continue the contraction and consolidation of the ski industry and threaten individual ski businesses and communities that rely on ski tourism." Sincerely, HopsonRoad ( talk) 21:30, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
The article French language in the United States states that Maine and Vermont have the highest share of French speakers among US states. The article on Maine shows 5% speaking French. This article does not mention present-day French speakers in the infobox or in the article. I assume the source is the Census for language spoken. Is it available? - - Prairieplant ( talk) 07:47, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Vermont is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Vermont until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America 1000 10:49, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi Dylanvt, I notice that you put a "clarification needed" tag in the "Vermont speech patterns" section. What do you feel would be helpful to create the clarity that is missing for you? Cheers from another Vermonter, HopsonRoad ( talk) 21:21, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
Several changes to the coordinate precision have been made in the last few days. I have reviewed the guideline at Wikipedia:WikiProject Geographical coordinates#Precision guidelines which I belive support this edit by User:Sanjay7373 so I have restored it. Jc3s5h ( talk) 19:51, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
An IP editor reverted this edit wherein I stated that, "Removed "Vermontane" as a demonym. In the cited reverence, "Vermontane" is used as an adjective, not a demonym". The IP editor contends, "an adjective formed from a place name and describing features of that place is literally what a demonym is, unless "French" isn't a demonym now". The "French" analogy is problematical because "the French" refers as a noun to the people of France as a demonym or to things pertaining to France, when it is an adjective, as in "French rivers". The cited reference uses "Vermontane" as an adjective pertaining to the land and not the people to describe "Vermontane rivers". I'll await further input before reverting the contribution. HopsonRoad ( talk) 21:33, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
Wiktionary defines " demonym" as "A name for an inhabitant or native of a specific place, usually derived from the name of the place", which clearly indicates that a demonym has to be a noun. HopsonRoad ( talk) 21:38, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
In the case of Vermont, the demonym is "Vermonter", a noun referring to a resident of Vermont, whereas the adjective that describes such things that are present in Vermont is "Vermont", as in "Vermont rivers" or "Vermont mountains". "Vermontane" is an archaic form of the same adjective that would be used to describe things in Vermont. HopsonRoad ( talk) 12:15, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
I recently made an article for the Vermont dairy industry. It is a work in progress. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you. Thriley ( talk) 03:49, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
The history paragraphs of the intro to the article are too long, and hopefully eventually I'll come back to this and shorten it up so as to be comparable to other states intro sections. No need for the history in such detail if it's expanded upon in the history section of the article. QueensanditsCrazy ( talk) 04:04, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
It's amusing to see the different opinions held by editors, including me, concerning how the first sentence should describe the region that Vermont is in. At various times it has said New England or Northeastern U.S. or both New England and Northeastern U.S. I suspect it will continue to switch around forever. - DavidWBrooks ( talk) 22:06, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
To foreigners, a Yankee is an American.
To Americans, a Yankee is a Northerner.
To northerners, a Yankee is an Easterner.
To easterners, a Yankee is an New Englander.
To New Englanders, a Yankee is a Vermonter.
And in Vermont, a Yankee is somebody who eats pie for breakfast.
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect USA, Vermont. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 29#USA, Vermont until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 08:50, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect USA Vermont. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 29#USA Vermont until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 08:50, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
This has a section that says "Vermont is one of the four U.S. states that were previously sovereign states (along with Texas, California, and Hawaii)." This is incorrect. First, California was never actually a recognized sovereign state with a constitution. It was formed by 33 people. Their claim to fame was they made a flag. Sorry, that doesn't count. Second. All 13 colonies were internationally recognized as sovereign states by the Treaty of Paris, and would maintain that until at least the ratification of the constitution in 1788, or until the US civil war and the 14th amendment, depending on whose narrative you follow. This puts the number at 16 previously sovereign states that joined the Union. 02:38, 20 April 2021 173.216.125.56 (talk)
Recently, an editor added a "Food" section that was unsourced and appeared promotional:
While that specific text was appropriately removed due to lack of sources, the editor does make a good point that there could be a "Food" section added here. There are three paragraphs down under "Other" under Agriculture that could be perhaps converted to a new and separate section. There could also be mention of creemee since that seems to have originated in Vermont. There is also no mention in the article about all the restaurants that are throughout Vermont. Anyway, I do think this is something to consider as a change to this page. (And I raise it here because I don't know when I will get the chance to make the edits myself.) - Dyork ( talk) 01:59, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
Why are Wikipedia articles for US States locking in significantly obsolete web-archive versions of the states' official tourism sites instead of providing a correct and CURRENT link? I can understand using archived articles to preserve the sources of specific facts from the body of the article. To me at least, common sense would dictate that the external links should be as current as possible, not a showcase for fossils... Thank you... PhotoBoothe ( talk) 2021-12-29 — Preceding undated comment added 06:34, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
Done Thanks for the tip! HopsonRoad ( talk) 15:47, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
I have restored good-faith removal of sections by HelpingWorld on the seasons, the ferries, and a list of the most notable Vermonters, subject to discussion here. I would like to see the question of each section removal or wholesale removal of material discussed here, beforehand. I'll start with notable residents. Sincerely, HopsonRoad ( talk) 14:55, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
I removed those sections for multiple reasons. First of all, a state that isn't really known shouldn't have 266 thousand bytes, the article has a obscure amount of subsectons that aren't needed such as the seasons and agriculture in Vermont. Second of all, I removed the notable residents simply because it is already elaborated in the article made for the notable residents and it has no citations. Last, the season sub sections (now activities) are outdated and aren't informational. `~HelpingWorld~` (👻👻) 04:31, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
This is the place to get specific about what needs to be tightened up or trimmed, so that we can discuss the merits of such a step in a given section. I suggest the following:
In sum, I suggest that improved writing in paragraph style, preserving only the most notable topics, is indicated—not wholesale trimming of sections.
Sincerely, HopsonRoad ( talk) 18:04, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
The edit comment on removing a short list of Vermont's most notable residents was: "most states just keep the article list and not name them on the state article". I feel that such an approach would bury these most notable persons among hundreds of entries and not highlight their importance. I recommend retaining a short list here. HopsonRoad ( talk) 14:57, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
Is the Natural Disaster Sub Section really necessary? Its not important and has no useful effects on the article. I don't believe that a natural disaster sub-section for a state benefits anything besides wasting space. `~HelpingWorld~` (👽🛸) 01:55, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
The question has arisen about the appropriateness of including such a rating in this article. Discussions about ratings of cities have pointed out that they are may be from dubious sources and based on dubious methodologies, e.g.
here and
here. I suggest that those discussions about cities do not apply to
CNBC's annual rating of states for two reasons:
HopsonRoad ( talk) 21:10, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
References
Most other references refer Vermont as the 14th state to enter the Union. The first state after the original 13.This article references "Vermont to the Union as the 15th state as of March 4, 1791. 2nd state to enter the Union." Please fact check this. 2601:190:4302:C60:A5CC:72E2:DF71:40B6 ( talk) 14:36, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
the squaron was only equipped with f-16 until 2019. since they fly the new fa-35a. 91.44.220.107 ( talk) 18:20, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
I've just boldly revamped this section as follows:
It is fairly long, but I've tried to keep it all specific to Vermont. Cornellier ( talk) 22:37, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 15:29, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi, @ TheLionHasSeen:. The data for the pie chart is from Public Religion Research Institute's 2022 American Values Survey.
There is a glitch on certain devices where it won't show on the map - but will on "list". Thanks! KlayCax ( talk) 18:36, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Noting Vermont as a major producer of maple syrup in the lead section may not be appropriate:
Therefore, I would consider this for revision but am not sure if this would be agreed upon. Any thoughts on this is appreciated. 2600:1700:FD0:E200:85B8:3F76:354:D519 ( talk) 03:22, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
I see a definite increase in population from 1880 to 1890
1880 | 332,286 | 0.5% | |
---|---|---|---|
1890 | 332,422 | 0.0% | |
1900 | 343,641 | 3.4% |
There's a growth of 136. Can someone fix this? I don't know how to edit tables yet. TheFluffyProto ( talk) 23:06, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
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 |
Maybe we should discuss this? I'm sure we can find reliable sources on both sides, since he has been affiliated both as Independent and as Democrat. The question is how do we list him? The template doc does not provide guidance. I think he should be listed as Independent, because his position in the infobox is "Senator," and he was an Independent at the time he was elected. Kendall-K1 ( talk) 12:24, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
Note that at Talk:Bernie Sanders#Should Bernie be listed as a Democrat now?, it was concluded that "In view of the sources provided, I would be content to list him as an independent [as Vermont's senator], so long as U.S. Senate—Party Division in the Senate, 1789-Present and Sanders' website are cited as sources." There has been no subsequent debate to the contrary. User:HopsonRoad 19:48, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
He did appear on the Democratic primary ballot in Vermont for the Senate in both 2006 and 2012, winning their primary, but he declined the nomination both times so he could run as an independent.
When Vermont Senator Jim Jeffords, a Republican who turned independent in his last term, announced that he was stepping down in 2006, Sanders jumped into a race that a number of Democrats would have liked to run. He won the Democratic primary and then declined the nomination, mounting an audacious independent run that was not supposed to be easy.
@ Archwayh:, thank you for recognizing my good faith in this matter, as I recognize yours. I further appreciate your desire to educate the English-speaking world about the excellent people that my state sends to Congress. What I've been trying to do is to educate the readership on the oddities of American politics, which sometime run counter-intuitive to what appears to be obvious—in this instance, Sanders being listed as (I) in the US Senate, when he is running for president as (D)! Cheers, User:HopsonRoad 14:21, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
But that's my point, entirely. Sanders represents Vermont in the Senate and there he is listed as an Independent. His status, as such, affects his role in office. It's with the permission of the Democrats, not by right of being elected under the party banner, that he caucuses with them. User:HopsonRoad 18:43, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
I still think he should be listed (I) on this page, because his listing here is as Senator from Vermont, and he was elected to the Senate as an Independent. And it's not just the Senate that lists him that way, so do all the major vote tracking organizations like Open Congress and Votesmart. Kendall-K1 ( talk) 03:59, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
This is a question that will persist until Bernie Sanders is elected president or until the next senatorial election. It will remain puzzling to new editors who drop by how this apparent contradiction can exist and it will be their good-faith desire to fix what is apparently a mistake, although it isn't one—it's the fallout of an unusual circumstance where a politician has one status in the Senate and another on the national stage. Sanders has steadfastly allowed his name to entered in the Democratic primaries for Senate in Vermont, with the agreement that he would run as an Independent in the national election cycle—this eliminates there being a different Democratic candidate to split the vote. By the same token, it would be impossible to run as an Independent presidential candidate at the national level, unless he had eliminated a Democratic rival. That's why he is a Democrat at this moment, although at heart he is a "democratic socialist." It will be interesting to see, if he runs for the Senate again, whether he repeats his past approach.
He remains properly listed as an (I) here and a (D) at Bernie Sanders. — User:HopsonRoad 21:12, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
This edit by Sigehelmus adds a source from Vermont Public Radio (VPR) about the local pronunciation of "Vermont", which is good. Sieghelmus also adds an IPA pronunciation, but the VPR show transcript contains no IPA symbols, so it isn't clear who created the IPA representation. The symbols used do not appear in the page where the tool tip leads, Help:IPA for English, so very few people will be able to make use of the IPA representation, or be able to verify that it actually represents the same pronunciation described by VPR. Jc3s5h ( talk) 16:50, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
I've always heard it as spoken here for NA English. Some old timers that I've heard, pronounced it "VUH-mont". User:HopsonRoad 02:23, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
I'm the editor who first inserted the IPA transcription and also the editor who recently decided to remove it. Months ago, I was under the impression that there was a more or less uniform "Vermont accent." My studies show that this is no longer true. I recently created the article Western New England English where I described how linguist Charles Boberg differentiates a Rutland accent from a Burlington accent. And neither of these even includes the now-dying r-less Vermont accent that once prevailed before the mid-1900s (i.e. "vuh-mont"). (Plus, all my actual Vermont friends just pronounce Vermont in a General American way; something like [vɚˈmɑ̈nʔ], dropping the T at the end like most other Americans.) I now agree with User:HopsonRoad; there is no one uniform local "Vermont" way to pronounce the word, so let's remove the one we have. Wolfdog ( talk) 18:24, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for your perseverance on this topic, Sigehelmus. Two cautions come to mind: 1. The map in Nagy and Roberts (P. 53), showing the east-west divide of language influences (along the spine of the Green Mountains), and 2. the explicit mention that the pronunciation of the state as "/vərmɑ̃ʔ/" is most commonly found among older, male, rural speakers, but still persists in rural areas among speakers of all ages.
I would support a note saying something like, "Among rural Vermonters, especially in the western side of the state, the use of the glottal stop can render the name of the state as "/vərmɑ̃ʔ/," causing the "t" on the end not to be heard." Cheers, User:HopsonRoad 23:14, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Sigehelmus, I don't concur with the statement, "Often pronounced /vərmɒ̃ʔ/ by locals of all ages, especially in rural areas of the state," because it implies that is a common pronunciation in the state. It appears to be found in rural parts of the western side of the state, only. That's why I chose the wording, "Often pronounced /vərmɒ̃ʔ/ in rural areas of the state." Furthermore, "by locals of all ages" doesn't add information. It's clear that we're speaking of Vermont residents, whom it would be condescending to term a "local;" mention of age is only significant if there were something to discriminate among the ages, which according to the source, there isn't. I also find it questionable to use the word "often" since the source doesn't explain the penetration of that manner of speaking among the general populace—it only discusses the pattern of speech among those who speak in that manner. Cheers, User:HopsonRoad 20:26, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
Sigehelmus has gathered enough material to have a brief section on "Vermont dialect." The question is, where would it best fit—under "Demographics" (which is mostly about census data on ethnic background) or "Culture" (which is mostly about high culture)? Thoughts on the subject? User:HopsonRoad 23:25, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
I have drafted a sub-paragraph on Vermont dialects, which one can view (for the time-being) in my sandbox. If there's no objection, I plan to drop it into the Demographics section. User:HopsonRoad 15:27, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
The typographic arrangement of our motto makes AND to like like NO. Remember, the actual flag is not a tablet screen, so we should type it more distinctly. Politicians are aware of the issue but NO UNITY brings more votes, even if it harms our beloved state! Add more data! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:587:4101:8C00:B8AD:1307:BAB7:BBB2 ( talk) 11:52, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
An editor has added content denoting the national origins of the Vermont population using a census search tool. Unfortunately, this appears to represent original research and not information from a reliable source, so I have commented it out, pending a discussion here. Likewise the editor added an assertion about people's national self identification with a long list of references that make it difficult to discern which reference actually supported the assertion and whether the assertion pertained specifically to Vermonters, which should be the focus of this article. I have invited the editor to discuss the matter, here. User:HopsonRoad 00:50, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Vermont. 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 User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*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.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 16:25, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 12 external links on Vermont. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20100907/NEWS02/100906009/Burlington-high-rise-gets-facelift{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.ncsl.org/programs/fiscal/balbuda.htm{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.timesdaily.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=NEWS&template=wiki&text=VermontWhen 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) 19:32, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
See discussion at Talk:Vermont/Archive 3. Sincerely, User:HopsonRoad 21:17, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Vermont. 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) 15:47, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Vermont. 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) 20:28, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
I reverted an edit without an Edit Summary (hit the wrong key, sorry) - it concerned the difference between the small population means that Vermont is "ahead only of Wyoming" or "only ahead of Wyoming".
The first wording is correct but it's easy to misread or be confused, so on second thought I'm going to remove the "only" which isn't needed anyway. - DavidWBrooks ( talk) 17:33, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Vermont. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.sphere.com/2009/12/04/whats-the-greenest-place-in-america-hint-it-has-8-million-peo/?icid=main%7Chtmlws-main-n%7Cdl1%7Clink5%7Chttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.sphere.com%2F2009%2F12%2F04%2Fwhats-the-greenest-place-in-america-hint-it-has-8-million-peo%2F{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20120330/NEWS03/120330011/President-Obama-addresses-crowd-at-UVM-in-BurlingtonWhen 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) 00:43, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Vermont. 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) 16:11, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
An IP editor and I have different ideas about which verbiage is more appropriate for the article:
Please discuss the relative merits of each and express your preference, below. Sincerely, User:HopsonRoad 16:12, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
The lead currently only reflects the history of the state up to its admission to the United States. It needs additional material to reflect the content of the article, better. HopsonRoad ( talk) 12:05, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
Scandal scenes were shot in Vermont too Khesia hopper7 ( talk) 20:58, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
Not a single mention of it, despite being the vast majority of visitors to the state. Really? 70.29.99.162 ( talk) 03:33, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
Should Sanders be labelled as a Democrat in the infobox? As per DNC rules he needs to formally join the party to run for the nomination. - Bokmanrocks01 ( talk) 21:14, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
@ DavidWBrooks, Servicio, Castncoot, Aboideau, Slightsmile, Rickscully, PootisHeavy, Jmertel23, Sjj109, Patrickneil, Rossdegenstein, and Cemateo: One or more IP editors has deleted an analysis of the effect of global warming on the state's ski industry in the state with this edit. Perhaps other editors can weigh in about whether the passage should stay. Sincerely, HopsonRoad ( talk) 02:25, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
Done I hope that the following text addresses the suggestions, above: "The effects of global warming have been predicted to shorten the length of the ski season across Vermont, which would continue the contraction and consolidation of the ski industry and threaten individual ski businesses and communities that rely on ski tourism." Sincerely, HopsonRoad ( talk) 21:30, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
The article French language in the United States states that Maine and Vermont have the highest share of French speakers among US states. The article on Maine shows 5% speaking French. This article does not mention present-day French speakers in the infobox or in the article. I assume the source is the Census for language spoken. Is it available? - - Prairieplant ( talk) 07:47, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Vermont is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Vermont until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America 1000 10:49, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi Dylanvt, I notice that you put a "clarification needed" tag in the "Vermont speech patterns" section. What do you feel would be helpful to create the clarity that is missing for you? Cheers from another Vermonter, HopsonRoad ( talk) 21:21, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
Several changes to the coordinate precision have been made in the last few days. I have reviewed the guideline at Wikipedia:WikiProject Geographical coordinates#Precision guidelines which I belive support this edit by User:Sanjay7373 so I have restored it. Jc3s5h ( talk) 19:51, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
An IP editor reverted this edit wherein I stated that, "Removed "Vermontane" as a demonym. In the cited reverence, "Vermontane" is used as an adjective, not a demonym". The IP editor contends, "an adjective formed from a place name and describing features of that place is literally what a demonym is, unless "French" isn't a demonym now". The "French" analogy is problematical because "the French" refers as a noun to the people of France as a demonym or to things pertaining to France, when it is an adjective, as in "French rivers". The cited reference uses "Vermontane" as an adjective pertaining to the land and not the people to describe "Vermontane rivers". I'll await further input before reverting the contribution. HopsonRoad ( talk) 21:33, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
Wiktionary defines " demonym" as "A name for an inhabitant or native of a specific place, usually derived from the name of the place", which clearly indicates that a demonym has to be a noun. HopsonRoad ( talk) 21:38, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
In the case of Vermont, the demonym is "Vermonter", a noun referring to a resident of Vermont, whereas the adjective that describes such things that are present in Vermont is "Vermont", as in "Vermont rivers" or "Vermont mountains". "Vermontane" is an archaic form of the same adjective that would be used to describe things in Vermont. HopsonRoad ( talk) 12:15, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
I recently made an article for the Vermont dairy industry. It is a work in progress. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you. Thriley ( talk) 03:49, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
The history paragraphs of the intro to the article are too long, and hopefully eventually I'll come back to this and shorten it up so as to be comparable to other states intro sections. No need for the history in such detail if it's expanded upon in the history section of the article. QueensanditsCrazy ( talk) 04:04, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
It's amusing to see the different opinions held by editors, including me, concerning how the first sentence should describe the region that Vermont is in. At various times it has said New England or Northeastern U.S. or both New England and Northeastern U.S. I suspect it will continue to switch around forever. - DavidWBrooks ( talk) 22:06, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
To foreigners, a Yankee is an American.
To Americans, a Yankee is a Northerner.
To northerners, a Yankee is an Easterner.
To easterners, a Yankee is an New Englander.
To New Englanders, a Yankee is a Vermonter.
And in Vermont, a Yankee is somebody who eats pie for breakfast.
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect USA, Vermont. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 29#USA, Vermont until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 08:50, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect USA Vermont. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 29#USA Vermont until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 08:50, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
This has a section that says "Vermont is one of the four U.S. states that were previously sovereign states (along with Texas, California, and Hawaii)." This is incorrect. First, California was never actually a recognized sovereign state with a constitution. It was formed by 33 people. Their claim to fame was they made a flag. Sorry, that doesn't count. Second. All 13 colonies were internationally recognized as sovereign states by the Treaty of Paris, and would maintain that until at least the ratification of the constitution in 1788, or until the US civil war and the 14th amendment, depending on whose narrative you follow. This puts the number at 16 previously sovereign states that joined the Union. 02:38, 20 April 2021 173.216.125.56 (talk)
Recently, an editor added a "Food" section that was unsourced and appeared promotional:
While that specific text was appropriately removed due to lack of sources, the editor does make a good point that there could be a "Food" section added here. There are three paragraphs down under "Other" under Agriculture that could be perhaps converted to a new and separate section. There could also be mention of creemee since that seems to have originated in Vermont. There is also no mention in the article about all the restaurants that are throughout Vermont. Anyway, I do think this is something to consider as a change to this page. (And I raise it here because I don't know when I will get the chance to make the edits myself.) - Dyork ( talk) 01:59, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
Why are Wikipedia articles for US States locking in significantly obsolete web-archive versions of the states' official tourism sites instead of providing a correct and CURRENT link? I can understand using archived articles to preserve the sources of specific facts from the body of the article. To me at least, common sense would dictate that the external links should be as current as possible, not a showcase for fossils... Thank you... PhotoBoothe ( talk) 2021-12-29 — Preceding undated comment added 06:34, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
Done Thanks for the tip! HopsonRoad ( talk) 15:47, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
I have restored good-faith removal of sections by HelpingWorld on the seasons, the ferries, and a list of the most notable Vermonters, subject to discussion here. I would like to see the question of each section removal or wholesale removal of material discussed here, beforehand. I'll start with notable residents. Sincerely, HopsonRoad ( talk) 14:55, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
I removed those sections for multiple reasons. First of all, a state that isn't really known shouldn't have 266 thousand bytes, the article has a obscure amount of subsectons that aren't needed such as the seasons and agriculture in Vermont. Second of all, I removed the notable residents simply because it is already elaborated in the article made for the notable residents and it has no citations. Last, the season sub sections (now activities) are outdated and aren't informational. `~HelpingWorld~` (👻👻) 04:31, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
This is the place to get specific about what needs to be tightened up or trimmed, so that we can discuss the merits of such a step in a given section. I suggest the following:
In sum, I suggest that improved writing in paragraph style, preserving only the most notable topics, is indicated—not wholesale trimming of sections.
Sincerely, HopsonRoad ( talk) 18:04, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
The edit comment on removing a short list of Vermont's most notable residents was: "most states just keep the article list and not name them on the state article". I feel that such an approach would bury these most notable persons among hundreds of entries and not highlight their importance. I recommend retaining a short list here. HopsonRoad ( talk) 14:57, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
Is the Natural Disaster Sub Section really necessary? Its not important and has no useful effects on the article. I don't believe that a natural disaster sub-section for a state benefits anything besides wasting space. `~HelpingWorld~` (👽🛸) 01:55, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
The question has arisen about the appropriateness of including such a rating in this article. Discussions about ratings of cities have pointed out that they are may be from dubious sources and based on dubious methodologies, e.g.
here and
here. I suggest that those discussions about cities do not apply to
CNBC's annual rating of states for two reasons:
HopsonRoad ( talk) 21:10, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
References
Most other references refer Vermont as the 14th state to enter the Union. The first state after the original 13.This article references "Vermont to the Union as the 15th state as of March 4, 1791. 2nd state to enter the Union." Please fact check this. 2601:190:4302:C60:A5CC:72E2:DF71:40B6 ( talk) 14:36, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
the squaron was only equipped with f-16 until 2019. since they fly the new fa-35a. 91.44.220.107 ( talk) 18:20, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
I've just boldly revamped this section as follows:
It is fairly long, but I've tried to keep it all specific to Vermont. Cornellier ( talk) 22:37, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 15:29, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi, @ TheLionHasSeen:. The data for the pie chart is from Public Religion Research Institute's 2022 American Values Survey.
There is a glitch on certain devices where it won't show on the map - but will on "list". Thanks! KlayCax ( talk) 18:36, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Noting Vermont as a major producer of maple syrup in the lead section may not be appropriate:
Therefore, I would consider this for revision but am not sure if this would be agreed upon. Any thoughts on this is appreciated. 2600:1700:FD0:E200:85B8:3F76:354:D519 ( talk) 03:22, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
I see a definite increase in population from 1880 to 1890
1880 | 332,286 | 0.5% | |
---|---|---|---|
1890 | 332,422 | 0.0% | |
1900 | 343,641 | 3.4% |
There's a growth of 136. Can someone fix this? I don't know how to edit tables yet. TheFluffyProto ( talk) 23:06, 19 February 2024 (UTC)