Jump to content

Talk:West Virginia/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Executive Branch

I am 105% certain that West Virginia Governor's can be elected to two consecutive terms. Jay Rockefeller did it in 1980, and Joe Manchin is running for reelection, according to Larry Sabato and others. This a huge piece of misinformation, and a huge mistake.--68.226.238.161 20:22, 2 June 2007 (UTC)Jake Waalk

Was that corrected speedily, or did I misread it to begin with68.226.238.161 01:49, 4 June 2007 (UTC) Jake Waalk

The article is inconistemt on the idea of whether West Virginia is the only state to have seceded from anothe. In one place it staes that it is. In another it says hat it is one of two with Vermont bring the other. Vermont was claimed by other states but considered itself to be n independent republic before statehood. Perhaps the author meant Maine which was once part of Massachusetts.


Shouldn't "The current governor is Bob Wise" be "as of whenever, The current governor is Bob Wise"? Unless there is some system to have this edited and maintained on a regular basis, that is. PML.

I'm having an issue with this "emotionally closer" stuff in the first full paragraph. What does that really mean in a factual sense? Can someone elaborate a little more on why we can state that those areas consciously identify with Pittsburgh or Washington? And why that is significant? --Postdlf 3:02 AM 03 Apr 2004 EST

Concerning the "emotional closeness" remarks...

i believe this to be correct, or nearly so. west virginia is a split state; in my mind mostly north/south, but possibly to the east as well (i'm not as familiar with the eastern part of my native state).

here in southern west virginia (charleston), i feel we most identify with the South. moving north up interstate 79, the northern parts (wheeling, morgantown, clarksburg, etc) seem to reflect more of a northern feeling, at least to me. some will say west virginia is a northern state, and some will say southern. i say southern.

Why is Hagerstown MD a major city of WV? Kwantus 21:18, 2005 Mar 6 (UTC)

West Virginia is an accident of political geography. Those living north of, say, Braxton County are definately 'Yankees.' Travel south of Birch River, West Virginia and one will find elements of southern culture. Huntington has a midwestern feel and the Eastern Panhandle is East Coast all the way. Youngamerican 19:59, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

West Virginia is a complex state, more so than appears at first glance. Given the context of its formation, I think comments on how residents view themselves are entirely appropriate for this article. Kurtbw 15:02, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Famous WVians

I deleted several people from the list that werent really from WV, if anyone has good evidence that suggests their inclusion, please re-add them to the list Youngamerican 16:11, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Usually and Probably, my best friends

After editing this page to the best of my ability (such as it is), I have yet to find a complete definition of Coal Field. Coal Field in the sense of where a particular set of towns and operations existed in realtion to the mining of coal in West Virginia.

Also, where is the data on mining is the "best paying job" in the "coal fields". Usually, thats the only thing done in a coal field. So, the idea of best, is irrelevant.

This is probably in relation to the service and government jobs in the area. The local media generally uses 'Coal Field" to describe McDowell, Mindo, Logan, Boone, Wyoming, Lincoln, and southern Wayne Counties. Since the area is not a specifically defined cultural region, this is a general term that can be applied loosely to any area in these counties. Hope this helps. Youngamerican 13:44, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

That would be the best way I could see it as well. The article in totum is need of some severe edits in relation to the coal industry as well. Good thing that there are so many opportunites to contribute. Excellent insight on your part by the way. Whitby Mark

Does not matter, a troll will muck it up anyway. Please disregard

Inbreeding

Look up any joke site, or live in a state which borders WV, the "hick" nature of the populace causes them to have a reputation for inbreeding, and placing them at the butt of the jokes of all bordering states. Agriculture 23:29, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

I have looked up several sites. You have to understand a few things here. If you actually believe that Wikipedia is a knowledge based org then, really, I could not care less about what folks joke about. In fact, why not post on the California state page, hey, a bunch of fags live there! A whole bunch of people say that. Its bad logic and at best, drug induced academia to believe that this is "trivia". If Posting about inbreeding gets you going, thats great. However, having lived abroad and in the areas you "know" about, it is at best sorrowful to see this waste. If you doi not know something, say that or better yet, dont post. In grad school, the hard thing was, saying, I do not know. You dont know that yet because you already believe you know it all. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.17.91.133 (talk • contribs) 00:40, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

I agree that the statement Agriculture is trying to force into this article isn't encyclopedic. Agriculture, cut it out. A statement like this in the article is like referring to "Ugly American" stereotypes in the United States article. The stereotypes do exist but they're not very significant. Labelling them as trivia doesn't alter the fact that placing them in the article gives them undue prominence. --Tony SidawayTalk 01:24, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, WV does have that reputation but not everything belongs in an encyclopedia article. Let's keep it out. Rhobite 03:54, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
Why doesn't it belong there? I only mention it because it is so prevalent, I note we have entire pages reserved for nothing more than slang for the word "Penis". I fail to see how this is any less encyclopedic, I find it more so. For the moment, I'll leave the page as is, as I agree we should discuss this. Agriculture 05:05, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
Ag, I know there are lot of jokes about West Virginia being inbred and stuff about Banjo pickers, albinos and whatnot...heck my home state (Montana) has a reputation or two also that I care not to repeat. We're discussing apples and oranges here...these articles shouldn't be engaging in insulting people based on no hard evidence...lots of folks think people from New York are "rude" (I don't) so does that belong in that article? Hell no. You see where I'm going with this? Step back from this nonsense.--MONGO 05:12, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

I can't believe the statement Agriculture made that, to paraphrase, the states that border West Virginia make fun of the reputation of inbreeding that West Virginia has. For Kentucky, at least, wouldn't that be a case of the big pot calling the little kettle black??? I'm from Ohio and we rip on KY a hell of a lot more than we do WV!

Paragraph is fiction

The following is almost completely incorrect:

On a map West Virginia's complex shape and irregular outline make it look more like a European country in configuration than an American state. This is because the processes that created West Virginia's eastern boundaries are more like the processes that created the boundaries of European countries. In the USA most state boundaries were established close to the time of settlement and include long straight lines and simplfying features that aid in forming property subdivision for new settlers. In West Virginia the boundaries were formed after settlement for the purpose of rounding up people with a similar socio-cultural outlook (in this case pro-Union, anti-plantation, highlanders) who were already there, just as the European boundaries round up people with similar nationalities who had been there for a long time. This process of rounding up people already spread around here and there results in the typical zig-zag, curving, and extending shape of the resulting political unit.

Facts:

  • The western boundary is the relatively large Ohio River, a rather big barrier to westward expansion and was the western boundary of the state of Virginia until 1863. This type of boundary is a natural one and has little to do socio-economic differences.
  • During the American Civil War, commencing in 1861-1862, efforts were made by the confederates to fight off Union (northern) forces in what, at that time, was the state of Virginia, which was a part of the Confederacy. In the far northern and western sections of the state, a long standing rivalry and antagonism had existed steaming back to the early 19th century due to different lifestyles and outlooks and a resentment of governmentled by the plantation class in Richmond, Virginia.
  • Settlers in the western and northern portions of the state oftentimes (but not exclusively), had migrated there from northern states and had no family connections with Virginians to the east.
  • When a vote was brought forth, those counties that were controlled by Union forces, ensured that only pro Union voters were allowed to vote (or the anti Union voters stayed away due to a fear of retribution)...the opposite occured in southern controlled areas, which in most cases, didn't even have a vote.
  • The eastern borders are along county lines that existed pre-civil war...counties that were very contenious included, Greenbriar (Union)/Alleghany (Confederate), and counties in the Harpers Ferry region, which was an extention of the Shenandoah Valley and physio-geographically, should have remained in Virginia, but did not due to the presence of the Union army. These county lines usually follow the crests of mountain ridges of major streams and rivers, not socio-economic zones.
  • Counties in the far west and north voted to succeed from the state of Virginia due to the fact that they were pro-Union to begin with.--MONGO 02:42, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

great knowledge, just not here.......

I am currently deciding on a doctoral program after a few years of post grad studies and a hobby in Appalachian history. My specialization is in the area of coal towns and yes, the state of West Virginia.

This is my last post in this forum as the entire WV state page is really a hodge podge of political agendas supported by maybe 2 actual users and numerous spoof ID's.

I have attempted to edit some of the data, but it is so badly written that the entire state page would need to be redone from the ground up. Suffice it to say, its pretty much in totum wrong. By 1850, the formation of Raleigh County was the start of the WV state idea, the Civil War gave it a basis.

The entire Union history is at best a joke and at worst, yet another ill written article practically devoid of any facts.

What an incredible waste of potential to come to a web page and see a greasy, pile of spaghetti, stolen from several incorrect sources and then, made to look like an encyclopedia with an actual (GASP) State flag.

Great Job.Whitby Mark 03:50, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Wiki said the page was too long

I pulled out 3 sections and made them there own entires, so they can be expanded farther. This brings the size of the entry down, and will allow for easier navigation. No information has been lost, all is in the new entries.

Some other sections like History should be pulled out and expanded in an entry called History of West Virginia. --71Demon 01:01, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Page length and History section

  • Page length is an important concern, though another way to address it might be to copy-edit and streamline what we have. Most of the History section in West Virginia is long, long block of text taken mainly from the PD Encyc. Brit. Now that this is the collab of the fortnight, what do we think of blending that section with the separate History of West Virginia here, eliminating redundancies and highly detailed specifics that could instead go into separate sections. It just seems that the broad outline of West Virginia history belongs here, and an expanded piece on something like, say, the West Virginia Mine Wars would be a separate article. I'll certainly pitch in. — Tenebrae 15:56, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
I am not entirely sure what is being proposed. Certainly both the history section in this article and the History of West Virginia article need a lot of work. But we should keep both. The history section of this article should be a brief summary. The History of West Virginia should be more in depth. And if that becomes too large, additional sub-articles could be created like "West Virginia in the Twenty-first Century". This is roughly the layout that other articles have followed. See, for example, the relationship between New Jersey, History of New Jersey, and sub-articles like Colonial history of New Jersey (and then articles on specific incidents like New York-New Jersey Line War). Cmadler 16:35, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
I agree-- best solution might be a new short piece for the main arfticle and a blend of what wenow have for the History article. Rjensen 16:38, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
I have built a new structure for the article based on WikiProject U.S. states, with redlinks to future sub-articles. Cmadler 17:03, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Agree also; I don't know why there is a suggestion that History of West Virginia be merged into this West Virginia article. Since this page would be the proper page to bring up issues with the History part, I'm deciding to make a couple of notes which could/should be addressed in the USCOTW:
  • The history portion on the West Virgina page itself is horridly long. The bulk needs to be cut down and placed into the History page. Much wification also needs to take place.
  • The History page itself is not divided into proper headings; it would probably be best to either divide it with a more chronological format (sort of like what was done to History of New Jersey). 3/5 of the sections should be merged together since they are all about the separation of Virginia and West Virginia. Information needs to be added as to what happened past the late 1800s. AndyZ 18:19, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

References

The references are ridiculously long and the article doesn't have any internal citation so who knows which source supplied what. Whomever added them needs to either internally cite or at least trim the list a little. --TwilaStar 08:01, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I added a section for better internal citation, but I don't know where all those references came from or what they relate to. Cmadler 11:43, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Facts on West Virginia

I think Facts on West Virginia should be broken/merged into appropriate pages. For example, it has a list of West Virginians which should be added into the List of people from West Virginia. The sections on professional sports teams and West Virginia state symbols and designations are already part of this main article. The only other content of that page is a highway map, the state quarter, and trivia. Cmadler 12:05, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

  • I totally agree Cmadler. I think the Famous West Virginians can be removed from Facts on West Virginia since I already added all of the people on that list to the new List of people from West Virginia. Where do you think the appropriate places would be for the picture of the state quarter, the highway map, and trivia? The state highway map could possibly be included in the Geography of West Virginia article when we start it up. The facts should probably go in the Geography of West Virginia page, too. As to the quarter, it's a toss up ;) --Caponer 17:48, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Moving those things into Geography of West Virginia sounds good. The quarter is already displayed in State Quarters, it could be put in the Geography section or any part mentioning the New River Gorge and/or Bridge.
I'm going to browse through some of the other state geography sections to get a sense as to how we should arrange that of West Virginia's. This state is truly unique compared to others, of course, because of its odd shape and odd position ;). --Caponer 19:25, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I removed a portion of the last sentence of the first paragraph on the page, which read something to the affect that West Virginia was the only state formed through separation from another state. This is incorrect. Maine was formed by separating it from Massachusetts.

List of people from West Virginia

Ever since I created the List of people from West Virginia, I thought the page looked a bit bland so I added a string of pictures to the right side of the page to give it some character. I know this is the least of the West Virginia article's concerns but I just thought I'd ask for your opinions. Feel free to switch up the pictures, I tried to chose a diverse array of pictures depending on their size and such. --Caponer 19:25, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

There are probably some people who will argue that a list should be just that and nothing more, but I think the pictures are a nice touch. Cmadler 19:37, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Lovely. Absolutely lovely. Jay Rockefeller isn't a native West Virginian but I can't think of a politician (with the enormous exception of Robert C. Byrd) that has made as big of an impact on West Virginia than him. Nice addition to the West Virginia page. Cmadler has a point, officially it is a list and some may argue whether or not the pictures should even be there, but they spice it up. Jhohenzollern 19:40, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Robert C. Byrd isn't technically from West Virginia, having been born in North Carolina, but after his mother passed away and his father put the children with different family members, he ended up here in West Virginia with an aunt and uncle. Although he wasn't born here in West Virginia, he's done a great deal of good (just as Jay Rockefeller has) for the state so he's very well considered a bona-fide West Virginian by just about any Mountain State native that you ask. :-) Additionally, I added Anna Jarvis to the List of people from West Virginia. She created Mother's Day. :-) -WikiFiend90 00:41, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Images

This article definitely needs some images...how about Seneca Rocks, or Spruce Knob...or even of Harpers Ferry or Charleston, West Virginia...there must be others. Also like to see expansion of the natural resources section, discussing the mountains and forest Monongahela National Forest...lots to do!--MONGO 05:20, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

West Virginia Template

I thought these colors and this layout was more fitting and inclusive for West Virginia. Feel free to modify, make changes or further additions!

I would kill the smaller cities, as it may be too arbitrary to determine which merit inclusion. Also, it makes the template rather bulky.Youngamerican 03:52, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
My issue with this template is the focus on geography. What about topical articles (history, politics, government, culture, people, economy, etc.)? Cmadler 03:57, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Maybe the counties should go and be replaced by some of the topics suggested by Cmadler. Youngamerican 19:34, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
As I look at it more, I would change some of the links across the top (Colleges and Universities -> Education in WV, Governors -> Government of WV), remove "Census-designated places" and "Villages" (there are only 6 listed!) and replace those with History and 1 or 2 others that I gave above. Also, the list of "Major cities" should probably include more - perhaps the entire list of "Large cities" (cities over 10k population) from the article. I think the goal of this template is two-fold. First it tells the reader a little about WV (regions, major cities, etc.). Second and more important, it helps the reader find the WV-related article or information they are seeking. Toward the latter end, it should seek to be inclusive of all major (i.e. Government of WV, but not Politics of WV which is a sub-article of Government) WV topics. Cmadler 13:19, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
I agree with all of your above comments and originally modified West Virginia's state template only intending for my changes to remain temporarily until other contributors shared their ideas for improving it. Feel free to incorporate the changes you feel are necessary! --Caponer 18:27, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

History: after Reconstruction

I have added a section "Hidden Resources" to help fill the current void in West Virginia history, which seems to end (in the article) after the debt to Virginia was paid off. However, most of the information with which I am most conversant is about railroads and coal in the southern part of the state. I hope others working on this article will help round this out, as these aren't the only things that should be included. What I have added could use some improvement as well. However, this is my attempt to help with the collaboration of the week. Mark in the Historic Triangle of Virginia Vaoverland 06:49, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Article Improvement Drive

Hey guys, I took the liberty of nominating West Virginia for the Article Improvement Drive now that it has reached "Good Article" status! Please take the time and vote! --Caponer 18:14, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Politics

The paragraph on recent politics stating that "Bill Clinton was supported by a large margin" is simply wrong. In 1992, 57% of West Virginians voted for other candidates, giving him the lowest level of support of any democrat in the state since 1864, and in 1996, 49% did, the lowest victory margin for an incumbant of any party in state history. It would be much better to say that "the democrat tradition, in national politics, began to decline under Bill Clinton, who got only a plurality in 1992, and continued when George Bush won the 2000 election, with a reference to that election's main page, since West Virgnina made Florida relevant. --SamC 18:34, 3 February 2006 (UTC)SamC

Where are you getting your data? According to here and here, It would appear that Clinton did indeed win WV by substantial margins. He beat Bush by 13% in the state in 1992 and Dole by almost 15% in 1996. youngamerican (talk) 18:52, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

You site the data. Clinton's "massive support" was less than a majority, contrasted to a majority support for Dukkais in 88, Carter in 80, etc. More West Virginians voted for non-democrats in 1992 than at any time in the last 90 years. Clearly, in national politics, the trend away from the democrats started not with Bush43, but much earlier, the state having voted majority for Reagan in 84, only 52-48 for Dukkais in 88, a very large majority against Clinton in 92 (divided among the two anti-Clinton candidates), again with a majority against Clinton in 96 (again divided), and then for Bush43 twice. The state has voted by majority for a democrat only once since 1980.--SamC 12:40, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

This page is now a mess

Last year it got too long, and a group seperated out many of the sections, so they could be expanded in their own articles. Now much of the stuff is back on the main page, and duplicating the seperate pages. The history is word per word that of the history page, there is not need for any of the history to be on the main page when it is all on its own page. --71Demon 01:06, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Fixing Associated Press Abbreviation

The article had the AP abbreviation as "WVa", but the periods are important: "W.Va." I've also personally been taught that it should be "W. Va.", (with the space), but there you have it. See Google for verification. Justen Deal 06:10, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Revert of Cross Lanes in town list

There seems to be a little bit of a revert starting with Cross Lanes in the list of towns. Maybe we can head off something at the pass with a discussion. Folks may recall that the good citizens of the Census-designated place have already decided that they are not a town, and that they don't want to be a town. If I recall correctly, the formation of a town has twice been voted down in the 30+ years I've lived in the Kanawha Valley. Listing Cross Lanes as a town seems to be going against the recorded wishes of the residents. Perhaps a more accurate method of handling this would be to create another list, either using the ackward "Census-designated place", or using the more descriptive term "unincorporated town". Please add to this discussion. Thanks, WVhybrid 23:29, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Changes

1) Changed "speech pattern" due to it being a stereotype and generalization, one cannot state that everyone in a political area has the same speech pattern. /*??WV speech is distinct and not southern. It is appalachian. Appalachian is used in the sense of a culture and not a geographic region.*/70.18.241.64 03:32, 8 December 2006 (UTC) 2) Appalachia is a term used to describe a region extending from New York to Alabama and can hardly be used in the context of this paragraph due to its vagueness, seeing that most of the south, and the mid-atlantic region are a component of Appalachia. 3) I've put back the fact about West Virginia's northern panhandle extending as far north as Staten Island. My proof is: The northernmost point in WV has a latitude of 40.63342N and the southernmost point of Staten Island has a latitude of 40.49475N. Check google earth.

Good work. youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 02:03, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
1) That section of the article wasn't intending that everyone in a political area has the same speech pattern, but was stating that "The USGS classifies West Virginia as a Mid-Atlantic state and not a Southern state, despite of the state's 1. Politics - West Virginia recently has been a Republican state (Along with the South). And 2. West Virginia's speech pattern has always been classified as a Southern speech pattern along with the South".
Basically, that section of the article was to argue with the USGS's opinion, by saying that West Virginia is a Southern state and not a Mid-Atlantic state.
2) Just curious, you said that you have proof that the northern tip of the Northern Panhandle is as far north as Staten Island, but on Google Earth, was the Mason-Dixon Line slanted or straight on the map? If you don't know what I'm talking about, here are some examples. Thanks. The Punk 15:28, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
Straight MD-Line
[1]
Slanted MD-Line
[2]

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 West Virginia. Please see South_carolina#Sports_in_South_Carolina as an example. NorCalHistory 16:27, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

cleanup-restructure History Section

About 2 years ago a group of us cleaned up the WV entry spliting off History, Eduction, etc.. into their own entries, because the main entry got to big. The entire History section, appears to be duplicated in the History of West Virginia section. Since we have a full seperate entry on the history of the state, all we need is a single paragraph. First discovered, became a state, hit about 3 or 4 highlights in a 3 or 4 sentence paragraph. Good into detail on the seperate section. It makes the main entry a much better article to read. Look at pruning the other sections down as well --71Demon 17:35, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Fishing in West Virginia

67.163.170.175 (talk · contribs) added a link to a trout fishing site here. This article only mentions fishing in passing so this link seems to have little relevence to the content at hand. Possible WP:EL and WP:SPAM issues. UnfriendlyFire 05:48, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind. someone was bolder than I am. UnfriendlyFire 00:58, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

West Virginia's secession

"West Virginia is the only state in the Union to secede from another state, Virginia, in U.S. history."

Didn't Maine secede from Massachusetts? —Signed, your friendly neighborhood MessedRocker. 20:47, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Apparently, Massachusetts voluntarily relinquished Maine, therefore it's not a secession. Makes sense. —Signed, your friendly neighborhood MessedRocker. 23:47, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

The beginning of the article says: It is one of only two states to form by seceding from a pre-existing state, the other being Vermont.Bcostley 18:35, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

This is not correct; Vermont did not secede from another state, it was an independent republic that joined the Union. (See the Vermont Article) Raime 03:13, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Offer some thing commonly taught by some high school West Virginia history teachers in the early half ot the 20th century. Today, I don't know how the approach this in our local schools. (Citation: " Chapter Twelve "Reorganized Government of Virginia Approves Separation" and early 20th century high school books is where this comes from.) Conaughy 01:13, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

It isn't even the only state to secede from Virginia (Kentucky being the other). However, Kentucky seceded earlier, so its secession isn't as well known. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 05:47, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

According to Article 4, Section 3 of the U. S. Constitution, it is impossible for a new state to be created from the territory of an existing state by secession. I think one problem here is that the contributors to this Wikipedia article don't understand the meaning of the word "secession." Secession implies a conflict with the existing state out of whose territory secessionists are trying to create a new state. Simply forming a state out of the territory of another state, when that state consents without conflict, is not secession. At least four states have been created from the territory of other states: West Virginia and Kentucky from Virginia, Tennessee from North Carolina, and Maine from Massachussetts. The territory which comprises Vermont was claimed by New Hampshire, New York and Massachussetts, but seeing the doubt caused by these conflicting claims, it's hard to say whose territory Vermont was created out of. The bulk of Alabama and Mississippi were once part of Georgia as well, but Georgia consented to relinquish some of its territory to form the Mississippi Territory, which later became those two states. Now, there have been secessionist movements in history to create new states from parts of old ones, but they can't succeed because the U. S. Constitution forbids it. It's true, there was a convention to create the state of West Virginia by secession, but legally it didn't work. (More about that in a moment.) I know of one other secessionist movement: that of the state of Franklin. There was an attempt to create a state called Franklin out of the territory of North Carolina, but it failed because North Carolina refused to go along. The territory of Franklin later became a part of Tennessee. As for West Virginia, the secessionist convention of 1861 couldn't work legally because of the strictures of the U. S. Constitution. Furthermore, the comment that West Virginia was created out of a Confederate State is not legally recognised because the U. S. government never recognised the existence of the Confederacy. To get around these legal problems, a Loyalist government of Virginia was the real result of the secession convention of 1861 in Wheeling. Virginia then had two governments: a Confederate one in Richmond and a Union one in Wheeling. Virginia was represented in the U. S. Congress all during the Civil War--by representatives mainly from what is now West Virginia. (Tennessee also had representation in Washington, D. C. throughout the Civil War in the person of Senator Andrew Johnson.) This loyalist Union state government of Virginia gave permission to erect the state of West Virginia from the territory of Virginia in 1863. The loyalist Union government of Virginia then moved to Alexandria, whence it competed with the Confederate state government in Richmond until the end of the Civil War. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.216.36.97 (talk) 05:11, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Unnecessary and, well, a bit stupid sounding

"For these reasons, West Virginia can be noted as the southernmost Northeastern state, the northernmost Southeastern state, the easternmost Midwestern state as well as the westernmost Eastern state."

Very confusing and seems to drone on and on.

68.49.1.207 02:10, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

I put the famous explanatory phrase back into the article's introduction. The claim is an important part of West Virginian culture and describes the social melting pot the state is known for.

Something to be noticed in the very first line of text... "the worst state?" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.227.118.63 (talk) 11:43, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Recent edits, WP style

I have noticed that recent edits, mostly of historical content, but also to the lead, seem to have taken a lot of liberty with WP:Style to be gracious. As a nother editor commented, also apparently too overhwlemed to do much as I also am, there are even are sentence fragments that don't seem to make sense and external links pasted in text, even in the lead. Much of the new content is not properly cited as sources, although sources are named, perhaps not as bad as information which connaot be documented. A lot of work went into gaining GA status for this article in the past; I hope someone with enough time while take a look at these observations, and if my comments are found to be legitimate concern warranting improvements,that they will be made. Thanks. Mark in Historic Triangle 04:15, 13 August 2007 (UTC)


Sir, please delete any of the following as you see fit from these subsections including the History of West Virginia article: 

(1.1) The West Virginia golden antiquity periods 
(1.2) West Virginia Mound Builders 
(2) Twilight of colonization 
(2.2) The Late Mixing Era 
(4) Early river traffic 
(4.1) Birch bark canoes 
(4.2) Flat boats 
(4.3) Pirogue mail carrier 
(4.4) Military craft and first packet trade 
(4.5) Keel boat mail carriers 
(4.6) Early steamboats

I sent you a message concerning this before I realized I had not logged in, apologies. Thankyou seasoned Wiki editors who help me understand the concept over the past several months. Conaughy 18:02, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

I believe I have miscommunicated and perhaps offended, for which, may I apologize? I do not question the veracity or value of the additional information, nor that it has been added in good faith and to our benefit. I am grateful for such detailed content in an article I share an interest in. I should have made that more clear.
What I meant to say was that we need to do some work to ease it into WP presentation style, as we want to keep the GA rating. Every editor needn't learn extensive WP stuff to contribute great value. There are others who know the WP procedures, but wouldn't be as familar with the content or how to access it. A major magic of Wikipedia is collaboration.
My concern is that I have worked on other articles where we lost great content because we hadn't followed the WP rules for sourcing, etc. It would be a shame to lose the content gains or our GA status for such WP reasons. Perhaps this is greedy (or hopefully, just ambitious); I feel we can have both. I hope someone with WP familiarity can collaborate with these contributions, resulting in win-win. Mark in Historic Triangle 18:15, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Thankyou for clarifying your meaning. Conaughy 13:07, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Clarification of Civil War claim

I find the first part of this line dubious, at least without citation or clarification:

It is the only state formed as a direct result of the American Civil War, and the only state to form by seceding from a Confederate state.

Since both West Virginia and Nevada (Oct. 31, 1864) were admitted to the Union as states during the Civil War, the first claim appears false. Am I missing something? Is that line trying to say something other than what it actually says, or is it simply mistaken? I'd like to change it to reflect Nevada's admission, but I wanted to ask for input first. Ashdog137 (talk) 06:28, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

After reviewing the Nevada article, I can see where you're coming from. However, I believe the phrasing is correct if looked at closely. Nevada was on its way to statehood at the time of the 1864 election; however, the concept of breaking away from Virginia to form a new state was born of a conflict directly tied to the succession of the southern states from the Union.:
"On April 17, 1861, days after Lincoln's order to seize Fort Sumter in South Carolina, a convention of Virginians voted to submit a secession bill to the people. Led by Clarksburg's John S. Carlile, western delegates marched out of the Secession Convention, vowing to form a state government loyal to the Union."[3]
That convention conflict likely needs to be highlighted further down the article in order to give the statement at the header some support, as it does sound rather baseless, currently.
--TarrVetus (talk) 13:10, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
I certainly concur that the claim to being the only state to form by seceding from a Confederate state is true, and that this fact gives West Virginia a special distinction. However, it's also true that Nevada's state slogan is "Battle Born", reflecting the birth of the state as a direct result of the Civil War; it's the only phrase to appear on the state flag, other than "Nevada." Also, statehood was granted as a free state at that time specifically to bolster Lincoln and the Republicans in Congress, thereby strengthening the Union war effort.
I think it would improve the article if the truly unique claim were highlighted -- only state to form by secession from a Confederate state -- with the dubious claim either clarified and moved to the end of the sentence or removed altogether. Ashdog137 (talk) 18:48, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Second intro paragraph

Its a little long and specific to be in an introduction. Most of the information can be moved elsewhere I think, or if its redundant, deleted.MrPMonday (talk) 21:09, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

No information about religion?

I've been going through Wikipedia articles on US states to get some statistics about religions, but this article doesn't appear to have any info on West Virginia's religions. I mean, am I missing something here, because I can't find any mention of religion on the page, is it in some sub-article? Or has the info just never been put on Wiki? If so then someone needs to find the data and make it like all the other state articles which do have this information. --Hibernian (talk) 00:17, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for catching that. I've added the West Virginia results for the somewhat standard survey being used on many other state articles; of course, feel free to tweak with the format if you want, but the basic numbers and reference are there now. AlexiusHoratius 02:15, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Ok, cool thanks, looks good now. --Hibernian (talk) 15:18, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

But the numbers don't add upp to 100%: 75+13+4+6=98% --130.208.138.54 (talk) 23:35, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Why is the percentage for Catholics listed separately from other Christians? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.67.234.133 (talk) 20:02, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

The total numbers in the article are the same as those used on the reference,[4] which also add up to 98%. From the survey, it looks like there are a few categories that were left blank, but probably had some members in WV, such as Muslim, Buddhist, and Seventh Day Adventist, but not enough to get to 1%. My guess is that leaving off denominations with less than 1% is likely causing the 98% total to occur. I know that these surveys aren't really perfect, but they're probably the best thing available to us for a state's general religious makeup. AlexiusHoratius 00:14, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:West Virginia/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

I do not believe this article qualifies under the current Good Article guidelines:

  • There are far too few in-text citations to reference all the material provided in this article. Specifically, there are number of instances when "hard facts" (i.e. dates, numbers, statistics, etc.) are left uncited, which is especially poor form.
  • Per WP:EMBED, lists of information are typically frowned upon in prose
  • The article also needs to go through a thorough copyedit to make sure that current prose is a good summary of West Virginia, leaving detailed information to the subarticles per WP:SUMMARY. Items like the trivia sections are particularly unworthy of remaining in a Good Article about a U.S. state.
  • Numbers and their units need to be formatted per WP:NBSP
  • External links in the text need to be transformed into actual citations, and the citations that do exist need to be formatted properly (i.e. at least a title, publisher, and access date for web references).
  • The sections should be formatted per WP:STATE

I have no doubt that the article passed in 2006 when standards were much lower; however, the items list above should certainly be corrected if West Virginia is to remain a Good Article. Best, epicAdam(talk) 19:12, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi. Since there has been no action taken on my comments (or even an acknowledgment of them), I have delisted West Virginia from the listing of Good Articles. When the above problems have been fixed, the article can be renominated for GA status. Best, epicAdam(talk) 16:51, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

i love w.v. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.52.230.89 (talk) 21:11, 14 December 2009 (UTC)


Ancestry

The source given does not confirm the ancestry data given. More importantly, the number of English is made here by the addition of those who identify as American to those who identify as Enlgish-Ameircan. That is ridiculous. People who identify as American are often English, but are also often Scots Irish, especially in Appalachia, as well as various other backgrounds who simply do not see themselves as anything other than American. I am changing the ethnicity numbers. Gtbob12 (talk) 14:12, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

The wildflower is incorrect

WV's wildflower is the rhododendron. I know because I have lived in WV most of my life, and took a WV history course. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.104.111.214 (talk) 12:51, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

The state flower and state wildflower are two different things. Bitmapped (talk) 21:49, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Unclear climate chart

In the Climate section of this article, there's a climate chart giving temperature max and min and precipitation by month, but it doesn't say what city it's for. Is it supposed to be an average over the whole state? Duoduoduo (talk) 18:32, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Request for Comment: Steeler Nation Criticism

(Note: Source in dispute partly justifies conclusions by citing West Virginia thus its relevance here). Please feel free to read & comment here. Thank you. Marketdiamond (talk) 14:37, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Wind Energy Section

a) Why is that not under resources?

b) Why does it have so much devoted to it, while comparatively little is devoted to coal? I assume someone had the data at hand, but coal is crucial to the state's history and current resources (and to lesser degree natural gas). While I'm sure it was completely accidental, it does appear that a disporpotionite amount of attention is being devoted to green energy sources — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.5.173.166 (talk) 16:55, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

WV redirects here

I typed in WV to try to get to the page on the West Valley Tomb designation, but "WV" takes you here instead of the disambiguation page for "WV" could someone please change it so that "WV" takes you to the "WV" disambiguation page rather than the page about West Virginia. I would, but I do not know how. ~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.211.168.121 (talk) 05:36, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on West Virginia. 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 22:18, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

West Virginia categorized as Southern/Southeastern/Upper South

The regional categorization of the state is primarily Southern or Upper South. General regional studies usually align West Virginia with these areas, or also Appalachian South culturally. There is no real connection of West Virginia to the Northeast. While parts might be somewhat Midwestern or mid-Atlantic the connection with the Northeast is tenuous. The confusion comes from the work of Howard W. Odum, whose influential "Southern Regions of the United States" in 1936 attempted to define the south by a quantitative study of farms, production, industry, etc. The final result of this study placed West Virginia in the south. HOWEVER, and this is very important, Odum was an old-time southerner who could not see West Virginia part of the south because of what he believed to be its Civil War history and he arbitrarily placed West Virginia in the "Northeast", despite the findings of his own studies. Odum's maps were used by the government and schools and these are the maps that put West Virginia in the northeast, but they are the result of Lost Cause bias and have no real basis in fact. Dubyavee (talk) 03:22, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

I just saw this edit to the article: [5] and I was very surprised. I had never thought of West Virginia, or even Virginia, as part of the southern United States, except perhaps for political alignment during the Civil War. But geographically, I don't think it is in the southern United States. To me, it is part of the eastern United States (doesn't matter that it's not on the coast), and specifically, I think it could be included in the Mid-Atlantic states. It's an inland Mid-Atlantic state. But I know we have to go by what the sources say. Corinne (talk) 19:19, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Nowadays, it's unclear where states lie in terms of South and North. The article does say Mid-Atlantic in the lead. I personally consider Virginia southern still, though just barely. West Virginia is Eastern to me. The article now seems to address the ambiguity. Scarlettail (talk) 19:26, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
As one of the frequent editors of this page I would like to explain. Both Virginia and West Virginia, on the whole, are part of the southern region of the United States, with some overlap into "mid-Atlantic". If you look at religion, dialect, and other demographics, neither state, particularly West Virginia, fits into mid-Atlantic, though people do like to include them in that region for a variety of reasons. If you look at the references given at the tail end of the opening sentence you will see it has good general support for southern categorization. If you read the first six paragraphs for Mid-Atlantic States, almost none of that applies to either Virginia or West Virginia, e.g., income, religion, ancestry, infrastructure, etc.WV is the 7th most Protestant state in the US, one of the poorest, one of the most rural. Together with Virginia they mostly lie within the Southern dialect region of the Univ. of PA's Telsur studies and all other studies of American dialect. There is one other issue, of which people may not be cognizant, which is that some people, particularly a certain type of southerner, does not want West Virginia included as part of the south because of their misunderstanding of the states' role in the Civil War. Yes, it sounds silly, but it is quite real. I can point to one very specific case of this with Howard W. Odum, who in his landmark study, "Southern Regions of the United States", using data from many sources such as agriculture, income, etc., found that West Virginia was part of the south. But, Mr. Odum, being a good Georgian and grandson of Confederate veterans, deliberately excluded WV from his definition of the south based solely on the Civil War, and despite his own research. Here are a few maps that show what I mean.

http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/ryrdravoce2wmnomyttyqa.jpg

http://www.ling.upenn.edu/phono_atlas/NationalMap/NatMap2.GIF

https:/upwiki/wikipedia/commons/a/a7/Census-2000-Data-Top-US-Ancestries-by-County.svg

https:/upwiki/wikipedia/commons/9/9e/US_county_household_median_income_2012.png Dubyavee (talk) 20:39, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Dubyavee Thanks for the explanations and the interesting maps. Now I'll have to read more about West Virginia. Corinne (talk) 22:31, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Recent edits

I was just looking at the latest edits to West Virginia, and I'm puzzled.

  • In this edit [6], Ernio48 changed "Evangelical Christian" to "Evangelical Protestant" as a category of religion in a table. S/He included no edit summary, which s/he should have done.
  • Then Magnolia677 undid that edit with an edit summary saying "Unexplained content removal" [7], which is appropriate. Changes to content need to be explained.
  • Then Ernio48 re-did his/her same edit [8] with the edit summary, "Not a removal, just changing so everyone sees evangelical christian is protestant too".

I looked at the information in the source form the Pew Forum 2015, and the category, matching the percentage of 39%, says "Evangelical Protestant". However, I'm not even sure Ernio48 even knew that because there is no reference to the source in either of his/her edit summaries. While Ernio48 should have provided an edit summary with his/her first edit, the fact is, "Evangelical Protestant" matches what's in the source. However, I'm not sure, but I don't think the edit summary accompanying Ernio48's second edit is a very strong reason.

Ernio48, you should have followed the steps outlined in WP:BRD:

1) Be Bold. Go ahead and make your edit boldly.
2) Another editor can Revert, for any number of reasons.
3) Rather than re-doing the original edit, the first editor should Discuss the issue on the talk page, starting a new section if necessary.

I'm just wondering if there might be a reason for using the phrase "Evangelical Christian" instead of the phrase from the table in the source. Perhaps it is a more easily recognized phrase. I don't really know. But the change from "Evangelical Christian" to "Evangelical Protestant" really needs to be discussed on the article's talk page. Corinne (talk) 17:22, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Both terms are correct, but the source states Evangelical Protestant and yes I knew that. Stick to the source.Ernio48 (talk) 21:50, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Largest Metropolitan Area

In the article, the largest Metropolitan Area in West Virginia is the Huntington/Tri-State Region. However, the Washington metropolitan area includes Jefferson County which is in the Eastern Panhandle Region. Thoughts? FunksBrother (talk) 18:31, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

I would leave it as is. The Washington metro includes only a small portion of WV, so it's not really relevant to the state as a whole. Dubyavee (talk) 23:46, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
WV is an afterthought in the Washington metro and only a small percentage of its population is in the state. The Huntington metro area is centered in WV. Stick with Huntington. Bitmapped (talk) 21:41, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Economy section seems pretty whitewashed

Shouldn't the fact that West Virginia is the second poorest state in the nation both in median household income and per capita income be mentioned in the economy overview? That Mississippi is the poorest is mentioned in the first sentence of the economy section of its article. Certainly seems more relevant than comparing its size to Iraq and Croatia.

It also really seems like the region's history of labor disputes between the coal industry and unions over wages and working conditions would be worthy of mention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.109.199.184 (talk) 02:14, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

...has the second lowest household income of the 50 United States.
I think this is no longer true - as of 2015 AK, KY, MS have lower household income, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States#Income_by_state. Gentleman wiki (talk) 05:04, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Slave or Free State?

West Virginia was admitted to the Union as a slave state. The article ought to make that clear. The writer seems to be skirting the issue. Missaeagle (talk) 00:15, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

West Virginia was admitted with a constitution that provided for gradual emancipation. This is already explicitly address in the article. I'm not sure how you feel the issue is being skirted, but if you can elaborate, it would be helpful to others to understand your position. Bitmapped (talk) 01:37, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 15 external links on West Virginia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 15:40, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Wind generation

There is a table here which appears to be keeping a month-by-month tally of West Virginia's wind generation. This table seems WP:INDISCRIMINATE, and does not contribute a lot to the article. The table was added here by a banned sockpuppet. The opinion of others about removing this table would be appreciated. Magnolia677 (talk) 14:32, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello?? Magnolia677 (talk) 00:37, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
I'd support removal. Far too detailed. Perhaps useful in some sort of wind-energy-in-WV type article, but not here. AlexiusHoratius 00:42, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

my text removed

The article misleadingly states: West irginia was part of the Virginia Colony from 1607 to 1776. However for much of this time the English had no control over that area. It was only the fiat of King James I of England who declared the claims oyou to native nations were invalid because they were at that time not baptized Christians. This is widely known to natives today and we hope so barbaric a rationale is not relied on for claiming this was Virginia Colony from 1607 when no white had set foot anywhere near WV. 172.58.185.136 (talk) 18:21, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

  • You are trying to make a point that no historian of Virginia has ever made. If you want to make this point then you need some backup from historical sources. This would be true of Kentucky as well. You should read the article Colony of Virginia. I am part Shawnee myself and understand the point you are trying to make but this is not the place or the means to address this issue. Dubyavee (talk) 23:01, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Are you kidding? I have seen plenty of sources make this point. So many that this does not seem too controversial. Now I have to dig up a reference verifying no Europeans had actually set foot in West Virginia until 1671? 172.58.185.136 (talk) 23:40, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

  • You don't understand what I am saying. It is not about the presence of Europeans. What you are writing is called POV, or "original research", in other words you are expressing your own definition of the Colony of Virginia in a way that I have not seen in any books. "On paper" is non-sensical. Almost all deeds, grants or land charters are "on paper", that does not invalidate them or qualify them in any way. I would suggest that you read Wikipedia's rules of editing. I made similar errors when I first started here. Dubyavee (talk) 14:07, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

The text in that section as it stands now is misleading because as numerous sources point out the English had no presence in West Virginia before 1671, and this undisputed fact is already cited correctly in the detailed section. It is not my intention to insert any original research, simply to find some agreed way to tweak the wording to reflect the already cited fact that there was no actual English presence in the area before 1671, and present a more accurate and less misleading picture. 172.58.185.136 (talk) 14:20, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

  • The presence or non-presence of Europeans in West Virginia or Kentucky has no bearing on the matter of the definition of the Colony of Virginia. It was established by the British king. You are trying to change the definition of what constituted that Colony. The Catholic Church gave Brazil to Portugal despite non-European presence in almost all of Brazil. You are trying to make a point that is irrelevant. Your edit as it stood was not justifiable on any ground. It constitutes "original research", which is not allowed. Dubyavee (talk) 16:08, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

It sounds like you are making the case that the land became part of Virginia in 1607 because King James I said so, when it is fully documented that this territory was diputed by other nations until 1774 and the claims of your King James were empty and disputed. For you to pretend this is not fully documented and that I am fabricating original research, is disingenuous, and for the article to endorse an empty claim that was disputed is pov pushing (a very badly outdated colonialist pov too) as well as misleading and deceitful. Do we need request for comments? 172.58.185.136 (talk) 16:40, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

It's this article that contains a misleading statement, and you seem keen not to rectify it and argue that James I saying native nations don't count, means native nations don't count. That doesn't wash nowadays, Dubyavee. How about we fix it by saying for example "West Virginia was originally part of the English (later British) Virginia Colony from 1607 to 1776. However, parts of these claims continued to be disputed by native nations until 1774". That is an already referenced fact, but note that "original research" accuses me of making this up myself, as if it were not a verified fact. 208.54.37.160 (talk) 20:38, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Size by rank is 10th, not 9th.

In the opening paragraphs it says that WV is the 9th smallest state. Yet, when you click on the link to the listing of states by size, it is clearly listed as 10th. Someone should fix this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.248.113.43 (talk) 15:36, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

The correct phrase is "rank by size", not "size by rank" as you put it.BLZebubba (talk) 10:36, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on West Virginia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 20:40, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on West Virginia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 14:21, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on West Virginia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 16:45, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Significance of RR

I came to this article, because I found an interesting section in Roadside Geology of West Virginia, pp. 1-2, regarding the border with with Virginia:

...Continuing east and then turning north, the border with Virginia is marked by mountain ridges extending all the way to the "eastern panhandle," which includes counties through which ran the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad, now part of CSX. So great was the railroad's military value to the Union during the Civil War that, when the time came to carve out Virginia's western counties to form the new state of West Virginia, these counties were included.

I checked to see if this interesting tidbit about the railroad's significance was included in the article, and since it is not, I would like to add it. Part of the problem is the passive voice--who exactly influenced this decision? Union is a bit vague. Not sure where best to fit it in right now. --David Tornheim (talk) 17:30, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Border Dispute

@Dubyavee: I made this edit to clarify language you added 10 years ago. The various border disputes between Virginia are Pennsylvania are complex, probably warranting their own article, rather than having the material being in Yohogania County, Virginia. And there is also the Penn–Calvert boundary dispute, which the article says includes West Virginia. Also, I also restored reference to Westsylvania, which may be somewhat duplicative with the previous sentence. Please feel free to correct any errors I made. I claim no special expertise in these border disputes. My changes are based entirely on what I found in existing Wikipedia articles. I did find this article on the border disputes, but I have no idea how reliable it is. --David Tornheim (talk) 17:13, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

    • Hi, there is some discussion of the border/boundary changes in the History of Virginia article, which might be the best place for the information, which can then be referenced in the WV article, though I don't know how lengthy it should be. I think there were also some border disputes between WV and MD in th eastern panhandle.Dubyavee (talk) 22:31, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

pronunciation

As with Virginia, the pronunciation given here has four syllables (for "Virginia"). I have always heard it pronounced in three (Vir-GIN-ya). What's the source for this pronunciation? Kostaki mou (talk) 20:31, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

“Secession”

The article uses various forms of the term "secession," but it's not always clear if it refers to Virginia seceding from the Union or West Virginia seceding from Virginia. Are there better terms that could be used? —MiguelMunoz (talk) 21:12, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Untitled

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

"West virgina" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect West virgina. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 23:08, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Southern region

The state is generally classified in the southern region of the United States. Reliable sources are used for this classification, and are noted in the article. The southern Appalachian region is part of the south and that is the reference here, as Tennessee is part of the Appalachian region of the southern United States.Dubyavee (talk) 03:40, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:West_Virginia/Archive_1&oldid=1251496787"