Talk:Mackinac Island, Michigan

Merge
Same question, different place. Is there any reason this article shouldn't be merged with Mackinac Island? older ≠ wiser 00:10, 10 May 2004 (UTC)


 * Good question. Are they basically coterminous with each other? That is, does one have a history, etc. distinct from the other, and vice versa? If the town were called something else, such as "Laketown", etc., would the article still be worth merging? -- Decumanus | Talk 00:28, 10 May 2004 (UTC)


 * I wish I knew. It looks to me as though the entire island coextensive with the municipality, although much of the island is unimproved, and there may be state land in it. But I'm not all that familiar with it, so I thought I'd get some opinions before I did something rash. older &ne; wiser 00:54, 10 May 2004 (UTC)


 * I don't know what the boundaries of the municipality are, but this map is illustrative . Based on it, I would lean towards separate articles, but I am not really deeply knowledgeable about it, to say the least. Anyway, it seems the island article could be plenty long with historical and geographical description without adding in all the Rambot-generated demographics. But like I said, I'm not really the person to decide. -- Decumanus | Talk 03:10, 10 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Oddly the area listed by the census data for the "city" are the same as those for the entire island while two-thirds of the island area is state park which surely shouldn't count as part of the city. I say keep separate if only because the Ram-bot stuff will make the nice pretty article at Mackinac Island look ugly. Rmhermen 16:32, May 13, 2004 (UTC)


 * I grew up on Mackinac Island and worked there since I was 22. My family has lived there for generations and owns many businesses.  It's as Decumanus said, they are different.  The Village of Mackinac Island happens to exist on an island named Mackinac Island.  Most of the island is a state park, and the State of Michgian has jurisdiction over that.  The rest of the island is part of the village, and has it's own Mayor, court house, police station and everything else. The village is the only community so I imagine the census lists them the same more like a summary.  I don't know of any islands with more then one city though, so I can't say for sure.


 * There are actually 3 entities being discussed.
 * 1. The island named Mackinac Island, the physical land, etc
 * 2. The Village of Mackinac Island, where people vote, get arrested, etc ;)
 * 3. The Mackinac Island State Park run by the state


 * 2 and 3 are located on number 1. I don't know if they should be one article or three, but they are very separate things in my mind.


 * Well, right now we have two out of three articles. We only need one about the State Park now. older &ne; wiser 12:22, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * Just to jump in on this discussion... a year later. There should be three distinct articles, as there are at present, as the three entities are definately NOT the same. Some of the previous comments aren't quite correct, however. Mackinac Island, the landform, is rather distinct and requires no explanation. Mackinac Island State Park only occupies a portion of Mackinac Island (the lanform) and reflects land ownership and a historical/recreational entity. The City of Mackinac Island, on the other hand, not only occupies all of Mackinac Island (the landform), but also all of neighboring Round Island as well. Trust me, I thought that was an error too the first time I saw it. However, further research using a variety of official sources from the State of Michigan, including the State Boundary Commission, the Department of Transportation (MDOT) and the Center for Geographic Information (CGI) all confirm that the City also encompasses all of Round Island as well, and has done so since at least 1899, when the City was created by the State Legislature as a "special charter city." Thus, NONE of three entities are coincident in geographic terms and are very different in terms of function/purpose. At least as I see it... I have revised the articles for the island (the landform) as well as the City of Mackinac Island. CBessert 08:35, July 30, 2005 (UTC)

History
Mackinac Island hasn't changed much since the 19th century. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.243.9.63 (talk) 18:09, 15 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Interesting... Most people comparing photographs of many parts of the Island from the late-19th Century to present-day views would say the Island has changed quite a bit since then. I guess it's a matter of degrees. CBessert (talk) 04:21, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mackinac Island, Michigan. 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://www.census.gov/geo/maps-data/data/docs/gazetteer/2010_place_list_26.txt
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060420072053/http://www.mackinacislandlilacfestival.com/ to http://www.mackinacislandlilacfestival.com/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:26, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Mackinac Island, Michigan. 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:
 * Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/64vfLAeJ2?url=http://www.census.gov/geo/www/gazetteer/files/Gaz_places_national.txt to https://www.census.gov/geo/www/gazetteer/files/Gaz_places_national.txt
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060420072053/http://www.mackinacislandlilacfestival.com/ to http://www.mackinacislandlilacfestival.com/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110108042656/http://www.marshallsfudge.com/mackinac-island-fudge-facts to http://www.marshallsfudge.com/mackinac-island-fudge-facts

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 14:53, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Establishment date
Is this city considered to have been established in 1670 when the mission was founded, or 1780 when Fort Mackinac was built? What is considered the founding year of Mackinac Island's settlement? 50.107.106.227 (talk) 20:19, 8 February 2020 (UTC)


 * The simple answer is: yes. You can make a case for 1670/71 and 1780/81 and 1817 and 1847 and 1899... it all depends on what your definition of "establishment" is and what you're specifically referring to. Hence, when referring to the establishment of a settlement versus the date of a specific legal entity being created, it important to be clear. Some early settlements were "established" only to be abandoned temporarily (sometimes for quite a length of time) due to any number of reasons, only to be repopulated later, so such "establishments" aren't always clearcut, black-and-white, unlike the establishment dates for the incorporation of a village or city, which is a very specific date. I believe the 1671 date is firmly supported in numerous historical documents for the general "settlement" on the Island. CBessert (talk) 10:21, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:08, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Flag of Mackinac Island.png

Incorporation date
What should the "date of incorporation" be for the City of Mackinac Island? It was long held that June 9, 1899 was the date the city was incorporated by the State Legislature, which, when you read the actual text, says "Approved June 9, 1899." Does this mean this is the date of incorporation? In the actual language of the legislation, Section 1 states "from and after March twentieth, A.D. nineteen hundred, the township of Holmes and the village of Mackinac... shall be hereby vacated, and all the territory now comprising the said township of Holmes and village of Mackinac, the same being all of Mackinac Island and Round Island... shall be and the same is hereby constituted and declared thereafter to be a city corporate by the name of the City of Mackinac Island...". Is this the date of incorporation or simply the effective date of the incorporation as referenced above on June 9, 1899? Is this splitting a very, very small hair? Maybe... but with two dates not only in different years but different centuries (the 1900 vs 1901 debate notwithstanding), it's a bit more important than it may have been otherwise. If both dates were in the same year, maybe it wouldn't appear to make so much of a difference, but with one in 1899 and the other in 1900, I think there may need to be some consensus as to whether it was incorporated in 1899 (with an effective date of 3/20/1900) or it was incorporated on 3/20/1900? Most other sources seem to use the 1899 date, including the State Park Commission ("Mackinac Island was incorporated as a city in 1899." https://www.mackinacparks.com/the-city-of-mackinac-island ) Since the act of incorporating a city implies some sort of action, I would submit the City of Mackinac Island was incorporated by the Legislature on June 9, 1899 with the effective date being March 20 1900, but I'm interested in hearing others' thoughts. CBessert (talk) 11:16, 5 April 2022 (UTC)