Talk:Kannapolis, North Carolina

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject United States / North Carolina (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject North Carolina (marked as Low-importance).
 
WikiProject Cities (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

David Ragan Birthplace Dispute[edit]

David Ragan WAS NOT born in Kannapolis, NC. When a driver lists "hometown", that does not mean birthplace. "Hometown" is ambigious, and in this case, means current home, which too is questionable. I live in Kannapolis and have no knowledge of David Ragan's actual home location. I urge you to find a real source; his offical biography states "Hometown: Unadilla, GA." Brad Spry 14:06, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:ColorLogo low res.gif[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:ColorLogo low res.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 22:12, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:ColorLogo low res.gif[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:ColorLogo low res.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:51, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Mecklenburg[edit]

According to the census data, this is the entry for Kannapolis in Mecklenburg: "Kannapolis city (pt.),North Carolina,X,0,0,0,0,0,0,1,1" In other words, zero population in the 2000 census, and somehow 1 population in 2005 and 2006. This is a very strange result and, unless you can find some other source that corroborates it, I'm inclined to think it's an error. I know towns in North Carolina enjoy very much the ability to annex with impunity, so it is indeed possible that Kannapolis has annexed land in Mecklenburg, but I think we need a better source than two digits in an interim census CSV. --Golbez (talk) 12:39, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

US Census Bureau documentation is the leading source for our geographical data for municipalities nationwide. If it's an error, how possibly can someone be both a resident of Mecklenburg County and of Kannapolis? Moreover, why would they even add a line for Mecklenburg County? You don't see any lines for Kannapolis data for Pasquotank County, for example. As well, see this map; there's a very slight portion of the city that extends across the Mecklenburg County line. This map from 2000 shows why it changed from 0 to 1 — in 2000, no part of the city was in Mecklenburg County. Nyttend (talk) 23:46, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
If it were an error, your question would be answered for you - they couldn't be a resident of both Kannapolis and Mecklenburg. So your statement doesn't seem to make sense. And being an leading/authoritative source does not absolve one from making errors, which we have no obligation to repeat if they cannot be corroborated. However, your maps are the corroborative evidence I was asking for, they do show that Kannapolis appears to have annexed land in Mecklenburg, as unreasonable as that seems. Though, there being a population of only one on the Mecklenburg side of the line is very curious. We'll see what the 2010 census has to say.
(Incidentally, do you happen to know what "Concord UA" on those maps means? Unattached? --Golbez (talk) 04:06, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Not sure if this helps, but here is the zoomable map using the 2008 census estimate and data from the 2009 census estimate. The 2009 data is different from the 2006 data. Might want to add a reference to the map in the article about the town having a few acres in Mecklenburg next to Shearer Rd. Bgwhite (talk) 07:19, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
This has been solved by the city and state. Evidently it was never intended to have land in Mecklenburg, but was part of a development annexed by the city. During the 2009-2010 legislative session, the 1.330 acre area of Kannapolis that was in Mecklenburg was deannexed. Kannapolis no longer has any land in Meck. The census factfinder maps above are older. The current census maps found at factfinder2 and the city's zoning map found at Kannapolis Zoning map pdf do not show that sliver anymore. Here's the deannexation law. JoannaSerah (talk) 07:49, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
I am going to go ahead and take out Mecklenburg, and then update the census figures as well.JoannaSerah (talk) 08:00, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the legwork. My point up above is that someone lived in both Kannapolis and Mecklenburg County, and the Census Bureau only counts individuals once, so at the time Mecklenburg was partially in Kannapolis. Moreover, our verification policy demands firm proof when you dispute statements made by highly reliable sources: state laws are supreme, of course, but without the proof that you give just above, there wouldn't have been a valid reason to remove it. Finally — if I remember rightly, UA is "unincorporated area", but it's been long enough since I checked that I might easily be wrong there. Nyttend (talk) 23:11, 12 September 2011 (UTC)


Dead Links[edit]

Many links are dead. This should be corrected--70.119.53.11 (talk) 04:47, 28 February 2012 (UTC)