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.
I noticed that in the climate section, where it mentions snowfall totals, someone has deleted Raleigh, which is clearly in the Piedmont, and added the annual snowfall total for Asheville, which is clearly in the state's mountain region. Just thought someone might want to restore Raleigh and remove Asheville.
IMO, the section on North Carolina's economy needs to be updated to reflect the recent takeover of Wachovia and the troubles of Bank of America. The section on North Carolina's "Finance, Technology, and Research" reads like a chamber-of-commerce advertisement for the city of Charlotte, and doesn't reflect the recent economic downturn in the city due to the buyout of Wachovia and Bank of America's severe problems. Just a thought.
This article mentions the nickname in the Lead (not linked) and infobox (where it has a wikilink) but not once in the body copy. It would be worth including a short discussion of the name and a link to its article in the main text. --Dweller (talk) 21:09, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
At the end of this section are two sentences that are clearly biased and should be removed: -Unverifiable source cited/broken link: "Unemployment benefits were reduced with the state opting out of the federal unemployment compensation scheme." -Biased point of view, this links to an editorial page, and is also false information: "Funding for education and social services was reduced." 188.8.131.52 (talk) 03:04, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Carrite - we seem to have a difference of opinion on "readability". I specifically formatted the Further reading section into two columns to improve readability, and you've reverted the change, citing the same reason. Two points to consider:
The two-column version takes up less room on the page vertically—about 1/3 less. That means the entire section can be viewed without scrolling.
The two-column version requires the reader's eye to travel a shorter distance to read a single line, which means there's less chance of the reader losing their place in the line or continuing on the wrong second line.
For the second point, I would especially note the long citations for Kersey and Thuesen. In a full browser, those lines are about 10.25 inches long; that makes it easier for a reader to lose their place horizontally on the page. The two-column format limits the lines to about 5 inches, which is much easier to track. It's not just a matter of style preference, it's accommodating the mechanics of reading. Could we please return to the two-column format?—D'Ranged 1VTalk 03:13, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
Use of double columns for Further Reading is typical of a very, very small minority of pages at WP; probably less than 5%. I'm not obsessed about the matter though, switch it back if it gives you joy. Thanks for the ping. Best regards, —Tim /// Carrite (talk) 03:32, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
The slogan printed on North Carolina license plates is "First in Flight", that can be seen in the photo in the article's Transportation section. Additionally, changing the link to "First Flight" redirects to a disambiguation page, while the First in flight link correctly redirects to a section of the article on the Wright Brothers. Please stop making this edit, it's just wrong.—D'Ranged 1VTalk 02:45, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
Why is there no map showing cities and towns? This article is sort of like a row boat with no oars. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 21:46, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Many state articles do not have such a map. The issue is finding an up to date, free map or having one created. If you have suggestions, feel free to propose them. Scarlettail (talk) 22:22, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
It doesn't have such a map because you didn't create one yourself, upload it to Wikimedia Commons, and add it to the article yourself. Wikipedia only exists because you add things to it. No one here is any more important to this process than you are. Anything that you don't like, and don't fix, well, you have no one to blame except yourself. Nothing gets fixed at Wikipedia unless people who care fix it. You have proven you care, because you left this message. Therefore, it is dependent on you to fix it. --Jayron32 23:47, 1 August 2014 (UTC)