Talk:Connecticut River Valley

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of Project Vermont, an effort to create, expand, and improve Vermont-related articles to a feature-quality standard. All Wikipedians are encouraged to join the project and help in any way they can.		Vermont Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.

	This article is part of Project New Hampshire; an effort to create, expand, and improve New Hampshire-related articles to a feature-quality standard.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as mid-priority on the priority scale.

	Massachusetts Portal Connecticut River Valley is part of WikiProject Massachusetts, an effort to create, expand, and improve Massachusetts-related articles to a feature-quality standard. For more information on this project or to get involved see the WikiProject Massachusetts project page.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.

[edit] Capitalization

FYI, as this is a specific region, its name is capitalized throughout. Rhobite 22:40, Oct 27, 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry, I know that consciously. I was sorta frusturated dealing with my lack of knowledge on the valley in Connecticut and northern New Hampshire and Vermont, and paying even less attention to my spelling and grammar than I normally do. Quintucket 20:58, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I think "Valley" should be downcased. Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Directions_and_regions suggests that only "widely known expressions" for regions are proper nouns: "Whether a region has attained proper-noun status can be a gray area. Use an appropriate reference if needed. Use lowercase when in doubt." -- Rbellin 21:08, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I'm not sure that's accurate. I believe any specific region should be capitalized. The question is whether it's used as a name or a description. In this case it's used as a name. Rhobite 21:20, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)

I see now that Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (capitalization) contains prior discussion suggesting the all-capitalized version is preferred. Sorry about the confusion; I might add a line to the style guide about this issue. -- Rbellin 21:55, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] This article is an unfocussed mess

As of October 5th, ,2006, this version of the article reads like a tourist guide, is jevenilely concerned with travel between NH and VT for fireworks, and sales tax avoidance, is devoid of history, demographics, economics or even geographical description of consequence, and enhances nearly no reader's understanding of the region, and is scattershot in its mentioning of significant aspects of populous centers. It fails to cite other relevant articles of, nature, history, geography and geology that already exist on Wikipedia. Much of the current content could be deleted, without any loss. Yellowdesk 20:29, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

I'll add further, that anything that this article could contain, could just as well be in a subsection of Connecticut River, which is far more comprehensive than this article. I think this article is a candidate for merger into Connecticut River, and should be turned into a redirect page for that article. Yellowdesk 05:16, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

True, but that doesn't make it a stub - it's got too much length and information to qualify for that title. What it does need is expansion, and as such an {{expansion}} template is far more appropriate. Grutness...wha? 23:32, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

There's a lot of historical stuff that could be added, and would make more sense here than on the Connecticut River page. The stuff I've read about early colonies of New England tend to use the term "Connecticut River Valley" for specific early colonial cores, both in Massachusetts, inland Connecticut and New Haven area. If I find the time I'll try to add some here. But in any case, Connecticut River Valley is a term I've seen often enough to think of as a notable cultural and historic region and not merely the valley through which a river flows... Pfly 01:43, 24 October 2006 (UTC)