Talk:Maryland

Untitled

Wondering how to edit this State Entry?
The WikiProject U.S. states standards might help.

"Flora and Fauna"

There is an interactive version of the USDA hardiness zone map just for the state of Maryland at http://www.plantmaps.com/interactive-maryland-usda-plant-zone-hardiness-map.php that might serve as an excellent reference.

Demographics

Does "LGBT rights and community" properly fall under "Demographics"? A cursory search of other state articles (AL, AK, CA, MA, ME, NY) shows that NONE of them include a discussion of sexual orientation under "Demographics" (although the article for California includes it under "Politics"); as a general rule, it seems that the main subjects are age/race/income/religion. This section, on the other hand, seems to be more a coverage of the political movement to legalize gay marriage... Considering also that: 1) five out of the six citations are from the same source, and 2) there is already an article that covers everything that this subsection covers - in more depth, no less - (Same-sex marriage in Maryland), this subsection seems unnecessary. Would there be objections to its removal? 173.10.131.218 (talk) 04:03, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes. Thanks for pointing that out.

The subsection is clearly history. I've moved it to start a new article Politics of Maryland, a stub, at this point.

I left a count, though not sure it should be there. Because of the heavy editing of the Project LGBT, we're getting a lot of statistics/material on that type of activity, overwhelming non-LGBT material. A bit WP:UNDUE at times. Student7 (talk) 22:40, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

History

Could somebody add something about the history/prehistory of Maryland before Europeans came? That was what I came to this article to learn after enjoying that section on the "West Virginia" page. But I didn't see anything about it here! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.6.107.65 (talk) 16:04, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Do a search for "Piscataway Indians". 2602:306:BDA0:97A0:466D:57FF:FE90:AC45 (talk) 07:22, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

mid-atlantic vs north-eastern

POV-based editor added the template for North-Eastern states here, contrary to consensus, and a (presumably) different editor restored that that with a change comment which refers to "Southern State". Neither change was an improvement. TEDickey (talk) 14:52, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure how it's POV? I thought it made sense more than Southern, which was the category that was restored, and Maryland definitely does not fall in that category. If Delaware and DC are Northeast, certainly Maryland is. Scarlettail (talk) 15:08, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

POV - you have to review the edit history, which has at times removed one category in favor of another. As for "certainly", there are applicable reliable sources to use; personal experience is not a reliable source. TEDickey (talk) 15:35, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

I take their edits with good faith and thought they made sense. Southern is a minority label for Maryland originating from the old Mason-Dixie line, which does not apply today, and is not nearly as widely used as Mid-Atlantic or Northeast. As for northeast, our own article, Northeastern United States, includes Maryland. Although Wikipedia is not a reliable source, consistency is useful, and, as I mentioned, it makes no sense for DC to be NE and not Maryland. In addition, there are other sources, such as weather forecasters like the Weather Channel and Accuweather that include Maryland in the NE, and the EPA includes Maryland in the NE, such as here: http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/impacts-adaptation/northeast.html

A large portion of maps on a Google image search also put it in the Northeast. There are some sources that put it into southern, such as the Census Bureau putting it into South Atlantic, so perhaps we can have that category, but I don't see why we can't have all three of South, Northeast, and Mid-Atlantic if we have to. Northeast seems pretty well sourced. Scarlettail (talk) 16:48, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

One of the smallest states?

What weasel words... I could accept 1st, 2nd, or 3rd. Maybe 4th or 5th. 6th or 7th is really stretching it. But 9th???

And a total area that is 2-to-8 times that of the actual smallest states?

Come on.

198.228.216.159 (talk) 08:07, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

The 9th smallest out of 50 states is in the smallest tier, and it's clearly small when compared to the majority of states that far surpass its size. I don't think it's a stretch at all. Scarlettail (talk) 12:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

remaining loyal, etc

There's no clue where the opinion about "remaining loyal" came from; if it came from the cite regarding 49%, a relevant quote would be appropriate, since it's unlikely that non-voting people exercised much influence over the legislature. TEDickey (talk) 19:50, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

poorly sourced anecdote

recent edits have dwelt upon fringe opinions, selecting sources - not at all encyclopedic. Wikipedia is not a children's historical novel TEDickey (talk) 08:09, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

That new picture caption is ridiculous in length. I'll look into trying to trim it down. Scarlettail (talk) 12:57, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

references about painting...

recent edits have cited information not found in the disputed source (verified by reading it, courtesy of google). Suggest you actually find a source - some may be hard, since the information appears unlikely. TEDickey (talk) 23:28, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Since the cited information does not actually appear in the given source, that means that each instance added fails verification. Link spam doesn't get better treatment. TEDickey (talk) 23:36, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

You did a very poor job checking, because they are all in there. It's late and I'll cover this tomorrow.

For starters though, you begin by tagging the source as "not in the source", that the painting is of a 1634 event. The book does mention the year-- 1634-- the year the colony was born, just like the reference says. I just looked at it again one minute ago.

Also--

• 1) the digital books are numbered differently

• 2) the digital books do not show all the pages.

• 3) The author says that she wants to destroy all traditional expressions of history (she has a political/theoretical agenda),

• • A) however despite this, she acknowledges what the painting is supposed to depict in detail

• • and that B) this depiction is the traditional, hundreds of years old "founding narrative" of the beginning of Maryland.

Which is exactly what the caption starts out by saying.

So she is not disputing what the painting says, she is disputing the whole field of history (she is a deconstructionist and they are very radical).

The caption also ends by saying that the image is likely a symbolic combination of real events (which is what the book says).

But he ALSO says--

• The painting itself is a part of Maryland history (the history of history).

So, the caption never says the painting is a photograph of what happened in 1634-- it says that the painting symbolically depicts the state's founding myth.

I't's like a painting of the first "Thanksgiving" in Massachusetts. It's the history of the founding story.

This painting is a depiction of Maryland's founding "Thanksgiving story", not a photograph of that day in 1634.

Thanks, 107.218.9.122 (talk) 11:04, 7 August 2014 (UTC)