Talk:Connecticut/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions about Connecticut. 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

Same-sex marriage in Connecticut

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)

Departments of Connecticut Government

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]].

They do actually have such a department, though the name is due to change tomorrow, as of this writing. Also, please sign your posts with a time and date stamp.--65.16.61.35 18:08, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

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)

Town versus City

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)

apparently user:64.252.99.226 is not vandalizing the page. He is trying to import the format from Florida, but saving piecemeal. We have been catching him partway through, and reverting. Ultimately I think the current text is better than the table he is trying to build (see the version today with time stamp 22:02), but he is trying to build something positive. How do we communicate with a user who is not reading the here and does not have a talk page? Jd2718 23:38, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

The text here should be a summary and the current short version is I think better. (Although why 45000 instead of the rounder 50000 as the delimiter I'm not sure). We can add a section in List of towns in Connecticut for a list grouped according to population like what User:64.25299.226 has been doing instead of putting it here. --Polaron | Talk 00:04, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

All reasonable. The 45,000 limit was in the previous long list, likely to include an extra few towns. I'll switch it later. Jd2718 00:18, 8 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)

Go ahead and change it to the largest municipalities, unless someone else here objects. Jd2718 00:28, 31 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)

It seems to me to be essentially redundant with the List of cities in Connecticut, except for the cities that are really towns that is. I'm proposing it be merged into it. --Elipongo ^{(Talk|contribs)} 04:41, 4 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)

I just have to say that that article is a great piece of work. Thanks to all the wikipedians who helped with it.

mikemillerdc 20:38, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Lieberman: Democrat or Independent?

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)

He will be listed on every congressional whatever as an independent for the next 6 years (look at VT). I would go with Independent, and add 'caucuses with the Democrats' after we see that he actually does so after reorganization. I would assume that more detail would go in the Joe Lieberman article. Jd2718 12:28, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

on the Joe Lieberman page, there seems to be a consensus that he should be listed as a Democrat. I am watching the Talk:Joe Lieberman page where there is a much more robust discussion. I think we should accept whatever the consensus over there becomes as definitive. mikemillerdc 16:46, 12 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.

"and has a very centrist viewpoint in the political arena." He's far right. Maybe he's centrist in terms of Republicans v Democrats; but they are both far right parties when compared to parties in other countries.

adding stuff

I think that you should add the indian relations!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sum383 (talk • contribs) .

Thank you for your suggestion! When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the Edit this page link at the top. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. Powers ^T 14:58, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

New Sports section added to updated Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. states format

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)

Proposed Ferry Services

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)

Hi Jd2718, I'm the one that replaced it. Maybe I just need some help with the editing. These ferry proposals have been floated before, and lately it's been back in the news. Google News shows a Connecticut Post article about the new proposal for a Bridgeport-Stamford-Manhattan link, but it's no longer on the Post's website, so I linked to the planning agency instead.

I think the ferry services that already exist at Bridgeport and New London should be mentioned somewhere, maybe with a mention about the new proposals (with proper documentation, of course). Maybe we can have a separate "Ferry" subhead in the public transportation section, but it seems like we wouldn't have much content for it. Any ideas, anyone? Cmprince 15:50, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

It's possible that ferry transportation could go in a unique subsection, but should not be associated with traffic congestion mitigation. But I just don't think the services are significant enough to go in the article for the whole state. Without checking, I assume the Port Jeff service shows up in Bridgeport and New London in that article, plus the casinos, if they have articles. And if a proposal for more service does arise, it could be noted.

Thank you for providing sources! The article really needed them. Jd2718 16:23, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Amazing education statistic

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)

If I had to guess, I'd say CBS just dropped a leading '1' on the stat. Cmprince 05:56, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

"Southwick Jog"

...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)

My Opinon

I think it is best for it to be cut in diffrent articles. Fattdoggy 15:21, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

New proposed WikiProject

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)

Wrong template

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)

What? Connecticut uses Template:US state, consistent with Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. states. Cmprince 00:47, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

oh! Sorry! my bad. I was just going threw the list of cities. I think I added the UTC-5 category 1 week ago when I was testing the template:Currenttime. Thank you! --CyclePat 01:05, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia "dot" appears in wrong place in Google Earth?

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)

I think they are read from (usually weeks old) database dumps of wikipedia, using the {{coor}} family of templates. The coordinate tag in the article appears to be correct now, so perhaps the problem will be fixed next time they update their data. — brighterorange (talk) 07:15, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Connecticut Discussion

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

Well, you're right that this talk page was getting lengthy, and I thank you for pointing that fact out. I have archived the old discussions. As for the article itself; if you hit the edit tab a warning message comes up as follows, "This page is 58 kilobytes long. It may be appropriate to split this article into smaller, more specific articles. See Wikipedia:Article size." Besides the fact that too much prose all together is tiresome for many people to read, there is the fact that for many legacy browsers and for users of dial-up services a large page is very difficult to load and view. So yes, this article does indeed need to be split up per Wikipedia:Summary style. --Elipongo ^{(Talk|contribs)} 09:35, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Mostly this can be achieved by pushing various lists into sub-articles and citing the subarticle, as I recently did to Connecticut#Education for the redundant list of colleges. Connecticut#Sports needs the same treatment, in that there are two lists on the page; an article entitled something like List of Professional sports teams in Connecticut is desirable to be cited here. The list of state insignia, and so forth in Connecticut#Names and symbols could also be pushed into a sub-article and cited. -- Yellowdesk 16:21, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

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

It is in the nature of a Wikipedia article to be constantly changing and developing. If you think any improvements can be made to the article you are encouraged to be bold and edit the article appropriately. Thanks for helping out! —Elipongo (Talk|contribs) 21:32, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

ESPN

Why no ESPN reference? MrM 05:39, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Connecticut is home to the headquarters of LOTS of companies, especially considering its small size. Even if major corporations were mentioned in this article, ESPN would be way back in line after giants like General Electric and United Technologies. —Elipongo (Talk|contribs) 07:45, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Ethnicities

"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

Not so. The above statistics changed after the last census supplemental survey, I remember when this news broke several years ago:

December 30, 2001 - - Connecticut hardly conjures up images of ravioli or cannoli. But according to the 2000 Census, Connecticut has more residents claiming to be of Italian origin per capita than any other state in the nation. (Connecticut Most Italian State, By Brian Carovillano, The Associated Press)

Some 16.4 percent of Connecticut residents listed Italian as their primary ancestry, edging Rhode Island at 15.9 percent and New Jersey with 15.4 percent. The results are from the Census Bureau's supplemental survey, distributed last spring to 700,000 homes nationwide. (THE MOST ITALIAN STATE IN THE NATION? GUESS. The New York Times Weekly Desk; Section 14CN, By William Cockerham - - Page 6, Column 3)

Names and Symbols

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)

It seems that section has been moved up to the intro and the citation left behind. I'll fix that along with a few other things when I catch up to this page in my watchlist again. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 22:56, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

CDP articles

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)

Economy

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)

redirection of county navigation templates to state template

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)

contested statements removed

There is, however, a great disparity in incomes through the state; although New Canaan has one of the highest per capita incomes in America, Hartford is one of the ten cities with the lowest per capita incomes in America, (The low number may partially be due to the fact that the city, like other cities in the area has a small footprint relative to a typical American city--only about 18 square miles--and therefore does not have more middle-income areas included in its total to "balance out", statistically, inner areas with older housing stock and a poorer population). {{Fact|date=February 2007}}
Fairfield County has become a bedroom community for higher-paid New York City workers seeking a less urban lifestyle. This in turn has attracted businesses wishing to remain near New York City to southwestern Connecticut, most notably to Stamford. {{Fact|date=December 2006}}
~~Hartford is the poorest city in Connecticut, with a per capita income of $13,428 (although see above). {{Fact|date=February 2007}}~~
Poor and medium wealth households are particularly affected by a very high cost of living, due to a combination of expensive real estate, expensive heating for the winters, and other factors. {{Fact|date=December 2006}}
As a result, the middle class largely fled the urban areas for the suburbs, taking stores and other tax-paying businesses with them, leaving mostly the urban poor in the older, central areas of Connecticut cities. {{Fact|date=December 2006}}
Glaciers carved valleys in Connecticut running north to south; as a result, many more roadways in the state run north to south than do east to west, mimicking the previous use of the many north-south rivers as transportation. {{Fact|date=December 2006}}
Before 1818 the highest court in Connecticut was the General Assembly, and later, the Upper House, with the Governor having the title "Chief Judge". {{Fact|date=February 2007}}
It is one of the few dual-sex tournaments in professional tennis and is the warm-up tournament to the US Open, played the following week in Queens, New York. The court speed and weather conditions are identical to those at the US Open. {{Fact|date=May 2007}}

Please do not return this information to the artilce without a citation.--BirgitteSB 18:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Re:#1 I believe only the parenthetical statement is controversial here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Polaron (talk • contribs)

OK I will restore the first part.--BirgitteSB 20:16, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Re:#2 The two-part documentary "Connecticut and its cities" by Karyl K. Evans and aired by CPTV in 2002 describes this phenonmenon.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Polaron (talk • contribs)

I have no idea how to cite a documantary. If someone made a film about it surely there is a written source on the topic.--BirgitteSB 20:41, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Re:#3 The second worksheet here indicates Hartford is the town with the lowest per capita income as of the 2000 census. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Polaron (talk • contribs)

I cited and restored this after re-wording it slightly to better match the source.--BirgitteSB 20:41, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Re:#5 The two-part documentary "Connecticut and its cities" by Karyl K. Evans and aired by CPTV in 2002 describes this phenonmenon.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Polaron (talk • contribs)
Re:#7 Appears to be validated by this and this.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Polaron (talk • contribs)

Somewhat but not completely. Nothing about the role of the govenor and it is all pretty unclear to me. If you understand it better please rework the description to what is supported by the citation and restore it.--BirgitteSB 20:41, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

State Motto

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)

Religion

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)

"Foliage"?

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)

I've added the word 'colorful' ahead of 'foliage', should work for now, I guess. Thanks for catching that. AlexiusHoratius 01:25, 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)

External Links / Government

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)

Thanks for noticing that - I've replaced the earlier link with http://www.sots.ct.gov/sots/cwp/view.asp?a=3188&q=392636&SOTSNav_GID=1849, which appears to be the one that was meant. AlexiusHoratius 21:28, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Question of Pronunciation

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 seem to say Conn-et-i-cut, not Connect-i-cut. --Zagsa 02:10, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

From natives, the second C is usually silent. However, the vowels seem off. I hear the pattern schwa - short e - scwha - short i, not the schwa - short e - short i - chwa that is represented in /kəˈnɛtɪkət/ Further, I get glottal stops for both T's, and I do not recall hearing them commonly pronounced as 't.' Comments? I wish I knew IPA. Here's my best try: /kəˈnɛʔəkiʔ/ Jd2718 22:59, 3 November 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)

Most of us natives pronounce it kin-EH-ti-kit. --Elipongo ^{(Talk|contribs)} 15:04, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

If you listen carefully as you speak you may find that you are replacing either the first "t" or both "t"s with a non-T sound. You may actually pronounce the "t"s as "T", but that would place you in the minority in the state. Jd2718 17:03, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

As a native myself, I would say that it is usuallt pronounced Co-net-i-cut Merry Christmas- Kaspazes 15:38, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

As a native myself, I would say that it is usually pronounce Co-ned-i-cut. Just like butter -> budder. :) 199.172.169.33 10:47, 9 November 2007 (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)

I'm from Connecticut and I know IPA. The pronunciation used by the overwhelming majority in the state is /kəˈnɛɾɪkɨʔ/. The (ɾ) symbol represents the sound of the two t's in "letter" and the two d's in "budder" as it is pronounced in North America. The (ɪ) symbol is the sound of i in "kick." The (ɨ) symbol represents the sound of io in "nation." The (ʔ) symbol is the glottal stop, which is the sound of t in "cat" for people who say it differently form the t in "top." /ɾ/ is another version (an allophone) of the /t/ sound. For some people, /ɨ/ is another version of the /ə/ sound. And /ʔ/ is another version of the /t/ sound. Therefore: ɾ = t, ɨ = ə, and ʔ = t. So the IPA spelling /kəˈnɛɾɪkɨʔ/ is a more specific version of /kəˈnɛtɪkət/. The article uses /kəˈnɛtɪkət/ so it works for native English speakers who don't have the same allophones as people do in Connecticut. Because of the allophones, the pronunciation given is correct for most people in Connecticut, most people in North America, and many English speakers around the world too. (Ejoty (talk) 11:59, 9 June 2009 (UTC))

Tri-State Area

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)

The tri-state area is an economic region -- it's convenient for retailers to target the three states in this area at the same time. It's not a dictionary defined region such as New England. I'm sure there are many tri-state areas across the country, anywhere the borders of three states meet. Please stop making accusations, it only fuels heated discussion. New England is a place, that's all. You're not bound by any law to feel like a New Englander just because you live within the borders of New England. Lastly, make new sections at the bottom of the talk page, not the top. Leebo ^T/C 12:46, 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 find it difficult to communicate with an editor who refers to me as "you people up in Hartford" and who puts words in my mouth. I'll reiterate what I told you on your talk page: Find sources if you want to add things to the article. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia of verifiable facts, not a collection of opinions from anonymous contributors who live in southwest CT. Leebo ^T/C 13:33, 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)

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. Please note: This is an encyclopedia, not a platform for expressions of POV, particularly POV expressed by anonymous IP users who post only on Talk pages. --orlady 18:45, 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)

Double wow. Connecticut is in both New England and the Tri-state area. The definition of New England is 6 states including Connecticut. The definition of the Tri-state area that is around New York is New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut. It doesn't matter how much connection anyone feels with either region. It's just what the words mean. Connecticut is in many places: New England, the Tri-state area, the east coast, the Anglosphere, The USA, North America, the western hemisphere, the crust, the earth, the solar system, the universe, North of the South Pole. Just because Connecticut's in the USA, does it stop it from being on the earth? (Ejoty (talk) 12:19, 9 June 2009 (UTC))

MAP ERROR

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)

locations by per capita income

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)

Your Mom's Boobs

"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)

Notable residents

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)

The additions for wrestlers are objected to by other editors since they're focused on very recent ephemeral notability. The standard should reflect a longer time scale. Tedickey (talk) 09:29, 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)

Is this person known to the general population? This person should be included in the more exhaustive article List of people from Connecticut instead. Qqqqqq (talk) 22:34, 20 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)

Revised quote

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. TomNyj0127 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:22, 14 September 2009 (UTC).

Introducing The Wiki Connecticut mailing list

Join today!--Pharos (talk) 00:23, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Introduction (wealth gap)

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)

Aside from pushing pov, it's a fact that certain areas of every state are either higher or lower than state averages. Whether that belongs in the lede is a matter of how much bias one wishes to introduce into the editing process Tedickey (talk) 10:06, 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)

Well, do some more reading. You'll find that this is not an unusual case. Tedickey (talk) 10:40, 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)

Certainly - you could provide selective statistics for every state, to compare state averages against small portions of other states. The point in doing so seems obscure. Tedickey (talk) 11:43, 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)

first settlement

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)

I've replaced the self-promotional source with the summary of the history of settlement found at the Connecticut State Library page. There's indeed a long-standing rivalry between Windsor and Wethersfield about who is first but we should probably not use either of these towns as sources. --Polaron | Talk 15:17, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

thanks Tedickey (talk) 15:19, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Atlantic Collegiate Baseball League

Per section title "professional", these entries are out of place. Tedickey (talk) 08:10, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Religious percentages

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)

Support - That's a no-brainer. Best, Markvs88 (talk) 12:59, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

tax on out-of-state income

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))

death penalty?

no mention of it's policy/repeal status? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.173.119.144 (talk) 04:17, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Shoreline/Coastline?

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)

The latter part of that sentence doesn't flow (starting with "only shoreline" it becomes obscure). The essential point is that one can reach the sea from Connecticut only by passing through New York and/or Rhode Island. TEDickey (talk) 22:03, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

I'll agree and I was proposing a work in progress because as it stands it is obscure. While I was technically correct, I realize that not everyone knows the difference between shoreline and coastline. How about "Although Connecticut has easy & direct access to the sea with a long maritime history and a reputation based on that history, Connecticut is bounded by New York and Rhode Island's borders at sea."? We could also add that "As a result. one can only reach the open sea from Connecticut by passing through those state's waters." Dbroer (talk) 19:39, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

that's an improvement TEDickey (talk) 23:39, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Economy Section - "Debt Burden" Addition

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)

News about the school shooting should go in the article

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)

Powered Flight Day content in Industries section

The article should contain content related to the act that creates a "Powered Flight Day" in the state. Any reason for removing this content?

On June 26, 2013 Connecticut Governor Dannel P. Malloy signed into law a measure which "specifies that Powered Flight Day is in honor of the first powered flight by Gustave Whitehead, rather than the Wright Brothers".^{[State of CT Public Act Summary 1]}^[1]^[2]^[3]^[4]Tomticker5 (talk) 16:33, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Copied from my talk page: What does is it have to do with Connecticut industries? The existing two sentences are already one too many. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:05, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Complete replacement of a horrid section

In the "Political Office" section we have:

The Democratic Town Committees and Republican Town Committees within each Connecticut city or town decide upon which candidates may seek a position in any public office. If selected, the candidate will become a nominee for that political party and will serve in the office if they receive the majority of votes in an election.The Democratic Town Committees and Republican Town Committees within each Connecticut city or town decide upon which candidates may seek a position in any public office. If selected, the candidate will become a nominee for that political party and will serve in the office if they receive the majority of votes in an election.

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.

Oh, i failed to save that before starting my first edit. OK, two poor but true sentences have now replaced the horrid one, and a new editor and i saved edits overlapping in time without an ed conflict. Cool!

--Jerzy•t 03:59, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Connecticut and Administrative divisions of Connecticut

Well. I think i was fooled by the gov't section of Connecticut, which says

where what needs to be said is closer to

Main article: Administrative divisions of Connecticut

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)

I've met my goal of making the coverage of nomination and ballot procedures accurate, and detailed enuf, i think, to correct rather than just cover over what the old version insinuated. The question remains of whether it's too detailed for this page: i assume that most of this, along with probably many other matters, should be factored out from here & scattered among various articles more specific than Connecticut, and i doubt i will try to decide that on my own.
Sources also needed, and i'm too tired to put down even the ones i directly relied on. (I'm talking abt SotS data. Also, a map that implicitly shows Stafford is the source of the "wound"; my bet is that working out what the boundaries should be is tuff, and Stafford got bent out of shape, or got frustrated with two many changed boundaries in too short a time, and told the state, or the other towns and bodies, to go shove it. Or maybe they are more concerned about coordinating with the adjacent parts of Massachusetts.)
--Jerzy•t 09:43, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Nicknames in Side Banner

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)

Hey, what happened to "Connecti-cuties"??
--Jerzy•t 04:03, 14 July 2013 (2 edits) (UTC)

[Blush] Oops, try to be a wise-guy, and make a fool of yourself. It's already in the main body of the article, with a scholarly reference.
--Jerzy•t 18:30, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Connecticutian source is not valid

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)

Expanded History section

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)

Famous Residents section

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)

Historical Population

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)

Recent Lead Edits

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)

Who Changed the Article? Why New England first?

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)

Connecticut has a longer land border with Massachusetts than with New York by about 10 miles. The NYC Metro area only includes 3 of Connecticut's 8 counties - Fairfield, Litchfield, and New Haven. In truth, New York's influence is less than that. About the only influence NY has on New Haven County is support for its sports teams. Fairfield County and maybe parts of Litchfield County are definitely in New York's sphere of influence. The rest of the state, not so much. I certainly never watched a local NY TV station when living in New Haven County. I could be wrong, but I don't even remember there being one. New Haven and Hartford have their own local stations. Never saw a NY cop there, either. CT's transportation system is only based around NYC in lower Fairfield County. With a few exceptions, almost all major highways in the rest of the state lead to Hartford or New Haven. And, while no part of CT is in the Boston Metro region, some towns are in the Springfield Metro region. The Springfield and Hartford Metro regions are very intertwined. Windham County is included in the Worcester NECTA.

The state is split. East and North are New England. Southwest is NY-NJ-CT tristate. Nothing illustrates it more clearly than this map: https://harvardsportsanalysis.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/connalt1.png — Preceding unsigned comment added by AJPEG (talk • contribs) 03:05, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

New England propaganda? Is this serious? And I concur with the above comment. Scarlettail (talk) 11:22, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Sir above, you are incorrect and you are only injecting your own, false bias into facts. YOU wrote land border, but NY borders almost all of CT, so stop the lie. NYC's influence on CT is VERY strong and that is the reason CT's is the wealthiest state. Boston has ZERO influence on CT - it is simply too far away. New Haven County and even Hartford (city) supports NYC sports teams and New Haven County is on the Metro-North line, which I do not think that Litchfield is, so I know you are only guessing these things and are not on the ground in CT.

NHC has always had NYC channels until recently when some Hartford stations tried to get them (WNYW) kicked off of cable systems, but they remain on the former ATT uverse. New Haven's TV station would have been in the NYC market, but since it exists, they put it in the Hartford market. If you think that Metro-North is only in lower Fairfield County, than it is a safe bet that you have never been to CT! Springfield, MA is an unspectacular city with no pull and they did not even have their own TV stations until Hartford helped.

There is no split and it is uneven because no matter is the entire state of CT loved Boston teams, the fact remains that Boston sports teams are out of market teams to ALL of CT. CT's teams and markets are NYC and Hartford only.

It is not a lie to say that CT has a longer land border with MA than NY. That's true. Long Island's influence on CT so minimal that it's almost irrelevant. By most measures, CT is no longer the wealthiest state and hasn't been in several years. For example, it is 4th in GDP per Capita (5th if you include D.C.) New York's contribution to that is nothing to brag about. For a long time CT simply tried to attract high income NYC workers by offering a slightly lower top tax rate than NY. I did not claim Boston had a strong economic influence on Connecticut. No one did. That's a straw man argument. The issue is that there is a historical, cultural, and economic split within Connecticut between New York and New England. That's New England, not just Boston.

You're really going to bring up railroads? They're only a big thing in Fairfield County and I already acknowledged that CT's transportation system was based around NYC in lower Fairfield County. Trains run in other areas of the state, but they aren't used nearly as much as they are in Fairfield County. I did not say one way or the other that Litchfield was on the Metro-North line - I'm not sure why you brought that up. All I mentioned were highways going to New Haven and Hartford.

The local Fox station was out of NYC? Maybe that's why I never watched it. I rarely watched any TV, but I'm pretty sure ABC was out of New Haven and CBS was out of Hartford. Or maybe you were just getting local New York stations because you lived close to New York? I lived in the center of the state - Meriden, Wallingford, and Durham.

Most of Connecticut is included in the Red Sox, Yankees, and Mets market. All of them are subject to MLB's blackout policy in, I believe, all areas of Connecticut except Fairfield County and a few towns in Southwestern Litchfield County, where the Red Sox are not. If you live in Hartford, it's closer to go to a Red Sox game than a Yankee game. I'm not sure why you insist that the entire state is a market claimed by NY teams alone.AJPEG (talk) 05:28, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

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).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:23, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

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.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:37, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:12, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

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:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140324093619/http://www.cslib.org/gov/weickerl.htm to http://www.cslib.org/gov/weickerl.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:28, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Consistent vandalism!

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)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140324093619/http://www.cslib.org/gov/weickerl.htm to http://www.cslib.org/gov/weickerl.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:28, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Consistent vandalism!

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)

Request) Semi-protection for Connecticut

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)

External links modified

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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/connecticut
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/INFO/COP/ct_links.htm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2005-11-29-wage_x.htm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7511426.stm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.southwickma.org/Public_Documents/F000102F9/S00476B50-00476B5B.0/The%20Southwick%20Jog.pdf
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cslib.org/jog.htm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cslib.org/panhandle.htm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140714141246/https://www.shipbuildinghistory.com/history/shipyards/2large/inactive/laketorpedo.htm to http://www.shipbuildinghistory.com/history/shipyards/2large/inactive/laketorpedo.htm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.mla.org/map_data_results

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:14, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

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}}).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:13, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

GA nomination

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)

Largest Cities/Towns in Connecticut??

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)

New England?

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)

I believe it's being used more in a cultural sense, the fact the SW Connecticut is more associated with the NYC metro than the rest of Connecticut/New England is the reason why it's there. —JJ Be rs 18:00, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

It's still an uncited, vague, and rather dubious claim. Perhaps residents Fairfield County residents identify as being part of the NYC Metro area more so than New England, but the borders of New England are well-established. I suggest either removal or clarification. 23.25.224.97 (talk) 18:36, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Opening Sentence

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)

I have to agree. I also noticed some other minor problems in the opening paragraph, such as a bad link, poor grammar, over-linking, etc. I've made some minor adjustments, including removal of the mid-Atlantic statement. —Dilidor (talk) 10:15, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk
Corrected formatting/usage for http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/connecticut
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/INFO/COP/ct_links.htm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2005-11-29-wage_x.htm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk
Corrected formatting/usage for http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7511426.stm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.southwickma.org/Public_Documents/SouthwickMA_WebDocs/southwick_jog.pdf
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cslib.org/jog.htm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cslib.org/panhandle.htm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.mla.org/map_data_results%26state_id%3D9%26mode%3Dstate_tops%26order%3Dr
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110613102359/http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/09000.html to http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/09000.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:35, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk
Corrected formatting/usage for http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/connecticut
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2005-11-29-wage_x.htm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk
Corrected formatting/usage for http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7511426.stm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/INFO/COP/ct_links.htm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.southwickma.org/Public_Documents/SouthwickMA_WebDocs/southwick_jog.pdf
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cslib.org/jog.htm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cslib.org/panhandle.htm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130927185519/http://www.cslib.org/tribes.htm to http://www.cslib.org/tribes.htm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151231223638/http://seagrant.uconn.edu/publications/magazines/wracklines/springsummer06/block.pdf to http://seagrant.uconn.edu/publications/magazines/wracklines/springsummer06/block.pdf
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.mla.org/map_data_results%26state_id%3D9%26mode%3Dstate_tops%26order%3Dr
Added archive https://archive.is/20140518193819/http://www.connecticutmag.com/Blog/Arts-Entertainment/February-2014/Meryl-Streep-Oscars-Stars-Other-Celebs-Live-in-Connecticut-We-Map-Them/ to http://www.connecticutmag.com/Blog/Arts-Entertainment/February-2014/Meryl-Streep-Oscars-Stars-Other-Celebs-Live-in-Connecticut-We-Map-Them/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:31, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:46, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Constitution State

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)

Scotch-Irish vs. Scots-Irish

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".

^[5]

Venango (talk) 23:20, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Some proposed changes

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).

^ "Malloy OKs law recognizing new 1st aviator", Norwich Bulletin, retrieved 26 June 2013.
^ Public Act (PDF), The Government of Connecticut, 2013, retrieved June 27, 2013.
^ "First flight dispute", The Courant, retrieved 14 June 2013.
^ "Bipartisan support Whitehead stae polka & second state song", Mirror, CT, retrieved 14 June 2013.
^ McElhattan, Kenton (1987). Our Line. Pittsburgh, PA. pp. 8–9.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
^ https://www.edweek.org/ew/collections/quality-counts-2018-state-grades/highlight-reports/2018/01/17/Connecticut.html