Talk:Maryland

"Maralind" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Maralind. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 22:36, 20 September 2019 (UTC)


 * I grew up in Maryland from age 10 and I have never seen this spelling. And I've been all over this state.
 * Are they talking about pronunciation? That is already addressed in the article opening.
 * Chesapeake77 (talk) 20:14, 15 February 2022 (UTC)


 * OK I see that Maralind is now in place as a "redirect" to Maryland, from a typo.
 * No one makes such a typo. "A" and "I" are on opposite sides of the keyboard. "Y" and "A" are not close to each other on the keyboard either.
 * The mere fact that there was a moderated "discussion" on this matter was a considerable waste of time.
 * Even worse that there is now such an unnecessary redirect.
 * Chesapeake77 (talk) 20:33, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Popishness
I changed the word “Popishness” in the lead to “Catholicism” because 1) no one uses that word anymore and just saying Catholicism is clearer and 2) it’s a slur.It’s been reverted as “not an improvement.” If someone would find a better word than “Catholicism” I’d be fine with it, but certainly just about anything is better than having an archaic slur in the lead of an article on a US state. TonyBallioni (talk) 12:41, 20 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Any reliable source on the topic that you're likely to find will use the term. TEDickey (talk) 15:46, 20 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Oxford dictionaries list the term as derogatory. You won’t find me surprised that Puritans used it, as they were indeed anti-Catholic, but any academic publication would certainly just use “Catholic”. The term is outdated and derogatory, as shown by reliable sources. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:34, 20 October 2019 (UTC)


 * So find some historian's relevant commentary to cite. The Wikipedia topic to which it's linked doesn't come close to the opinion which you are advancing TEDickey (talk) 18:00, 20 October 2019 (UTC)


 * An article about a term and how it was used in anti-Catholic legislation in the United Kingdom and its historical usage to attack American politicians doesn’t show it to be an anti-Catholic phrase? Are we seriously debating whether or not “Catholicism” is a better word to describe Catholicism than “Popishness”? We don’t need a source to use the common word for something. TonyBallioni (talk) 18:08, 20 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Err, yeah. Unless we're writing this article for 17th century anti-Catholic pamphleteers, it is unlikely that readers will understand what "Popishness" means. "Catholicism" is more neutral and more likely to be understood by modern readers. It might make sense to include a quote somewhere to explain why Puritans feared the Pope, but we don't need to adopt the language of the Puritans in order to write about them. Nblund talk 18:22, 20 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Oh...pope-ish-ness. Boy was I confused. I wasn't sure if this was going to be a thread about pop music, pop art, or pop culture. At any rate, no, it's generally an archaic term anyway, even if it wasn't a slur, which it is. The current rewording is better than it was, but it still look to pretty much be there for the purpose of squeezing in this archaic term. We don't do readers any good by telling them how Calvert did not contemn the papist in the circumjacent towns, whither the peccant Pilgrims did not suffer them, nay.  G M G  talk  18:16, 21 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Disclaimer: first heard of "popishness" today.
 * I think linking to popishness is good in that context, as the popishness article is relevant to that sentence.
 * And I would not call "popishness" a slur, as it is not intrinsically/etymologically pejorative. It is a quite descriptive term with a natural English-like word formation that is still modern (I do not know the usual terminology.), to such a degree that the word could reasonably be reinvented today, so I am not sure that we should call it archaic, either. Notrium (talk) 19:26, 21 October 2019 (UTC)


 * I mean, it's definitely a slur, as is the related "romish". You don't much hear it anymore, because anti-Catholic prejudice has all but fallen out of the popular discourse. The correct term having to do with the Pope is papal, and Rome, Roman. If you heard someone from...say mid-20th century backward use papist or romish, rather than papal or Roman, they were using at an anti-Catholic epithet. (It also tended to get tied up in prejudice about Irish immigrants to the US.)  G M G  talk  20:05, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

A solution?
, is it OK now? Notrium (talk) 17:47, 21 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Your change looks okay to me TEDickey (talk) 21:27, 21 October 2019 (UTC)


 * No. Thats not clear and it’s klutzy language. There’s also the issue that the article uses Catholic as its internal style, so it shouldn’t be mixed with Roman Catholic (this is the decade old compromise to the Catholic Naming Dispute: stick with what is used.) I’m restoring to my changes, as reliable sources and apparent consensus here is that it’s better. Additionslly, I just checked: it was the only place the word was used in the article, so including that as a summary in the lead is also not in keeping with our practice on leads, because the article does not talk about their fear of popishness. It discusses their actions against Catholics. If you want to use it in the lead, it needs to be changed so the article actually talks about it, and I highly doubt you’ll get consensus for talking about that in language no one uses anymore and that RS call derogatory. TonyBallioni (talk) 11:42, 22 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Yeah, the word is essentially a pejorative term for Catholicism, so this just adds a confusing redundancy.  Nblund talk 17:39, 22 October 2019 (UTC)


 * @Tedickey "Popish" is a totally bigoted anti-Catholic slur. You have a long history of posting claims without carefully checking them first.
 * You do this kind of thing on other Maryland-related articles too, to their detriment.
 * Chesapeake77 (talk) 20:22, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Region
It is unreasonable to keep reverting 'Southeastern' as a description of Maryland.

The 'Mason-Dixon Line' is not 'imaginary'. It is an opinion that it has been 'politically irrelevant since the Civil War'. (It also happens to be demonstrably untrue if you look at presidential election maps, as Prof. Frederic Paxson pointed out .) 'Many sources list' doesn't matter. The US Census Bureau is the source for most states' regional designations. That the Census Bureau is 'archaic' is, again, an opinion. If it is archaic, why is it used to support most states' regional designations?

The CB excludes Maryland from the Mid-Atlantic; it also excludes Virginia from the Mid-Atlantic, and yet Virginia is listed as *both* a Mid-Atlantic and Southeastern state. It is possible for a state to be in multiple regions.

Every edit is of necessity unilateral. I do not see any consensus on the topic, and the status quo is not any reason for keeping anything.

Maryland was founded, very much like Virginia, as an English planter colony. There are reasonable, objective reasons regarding Delaware and Missouri (although I do not happen to agree). Delaware was part of Pennsylvania, and the reason it exists is because of Pennsylvania. Missouri was the result of a compromise. None of these things is true of Maryland.

Maryland's recent former state song is not the state song of a non-Southern state. The flag of Maryland consciously includes elements designed to reconcile pro-unionist and pro-Confederate Marylanders. There were a number of Maryland Confederate regiments (which is not the case of Delaware).

On election night 1988, Tom Brokaw referred to Maryland as a 'border state' (a way that many other non-Confederate states described as Southeastern or South Central are described). This was just 33 years ago. Even more recently, former Maryland Governor Parris Glendening was Chair of the Southern States Energy Board from 1995 to 2003. He was also in the executive committee of the now-defunct Southern Governors' Association. I have found documentation of Maryland belonging to the SGA as recently as 2004. 

As recently as 2001, Maryland's state Senate president was elected chairman of the Southern Legislative Conference. I am aware that Maryland is no longer in said conference. But regional designations do not shift with changing demographics. Or, if they do, why aren't Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut no longer considered New England? Why isn't Colorado no longer considered a Mountain West state? For that matter, why is Florida considered a Southern state? My guess is it's because there's no other region in which to put Florida.

Notice the article says that MD is 'relatively progressive' within the South. That could now describe Virginia. 'Many people' are coming to be of the opinion that Virginia is no longer Southern. Will Virginia be removed from 'the South' at some point? Either it will, which is patently absurd, or it won't, which is hypocritical--the only reason it won't is because most people editing these articles will have a living memory of when Virginia was considered straightforwardly Southern, unlike with Maryland.

People seem to be of the opinion that Maryland is not Southern because it is heavily urban, liberal, or whatever, none of which is has anything to do with whether a state is Southern or not. 'Southern' does not mean 'country'. In the antebellum period, New Orleans was one of the country's largest cities. Today, Miami and Atlanta should disqualify their states from the South, by that token. If it's about politics, again, Colorado is no longer a Mountain West state. I don't know what it is, but it's not that.

Toadmore (talk) 08:37, 18 November 2021 (UTC)


 * First of all you have repeatedly ignored the warning on the edit page not to change the region. Second there is a specific talk page dedicated to discussion on Maryland's region (see top of page).
 * This topic has been argued ad nauseum. I think everyone agrees that Maryland, like Delaware and the District of Columbia, exhibits characteristics of both the Northeast and South. The previous status quo—defining Maryland as Mid-Atlantic (which the vast majority of sources agree on) and expanding on its connections to the Northeast and South later in the article—was a widely accepted compromise that has been in place for years (see: Delaware article as well). According to the Wikipedia Manual of Style, the lead paragraph of an article, especially the first sentence, is supposed to have a neutral point of view, which your edit violates. Another editor could just as easily and validly classify Maryland as a Northeastern state. This is exactly what happened in the past and led to an edit war, which is why the intro is what it is now.
 * Regarding your points above:
 * - You cite the Census Bureau, but there is no "Southeast" Census region. The Census Bureau itself considered moving Maryland, Delaware, and the District to the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic regions but declined for reasons of data continuity and comparison. Virtually every definition of the Mid-Atlantic independent of the Census Bureau's includes Maryland in the Mid-Atlantic.
 * - It's funny that you cite the SGA, since Maryland became a member of CSG East over a decade ago.
 * - The strongest arguments defining Maryland as Southern point back to its past prior to the Civil War. I could easily list hundreds sources, organizations, definitions, arguments, etc. going back to the antebellum period in support of Maryland being a Northeastern state.
 * - Politics, economics, and population density of course play a big role in defining a region. The rapid growth and industrialization of Baltimore from the mid-1800s onward (supported in large part by European immigration) is a huge part of Maryland's identity.
 * In any case the article lead is supposed to provide a brief summary of Maryland today (politically, economically, demographically, etc.), and while you are correct that there is no consensus on whether the state is Southeastern or Northeastern, there is consensus on it being Mid-Atlantic (which is what I was referring to before).
 * 007bond (talk) 03:47, 20 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi. I don't know how to do this so it appears as a response, so I don't know if it will or not.
 * Regarding your first paragraph, I was not aware of either of these things. I do not see why there should be a warning against editing the region, but regardless I was not aware there was such a warning. If there is, why is there one?
 * You keep comparing Delaware to Maryland, but these are two different states with different histories and backgrounds. Demographically, Delaware is dominated by Wilmington (and has been for over a century). Writing as though what goes for Delaware, goes for Maryland, is a red herring.
 * 'According to the Wikipedia Manual of Style, the lead paragraph of an article, especially the first sentence, is supposed to have a neutral point of view, which your edit violates.' This is an opinion on your part (and an accusation at that). As I mentioned on the edit page, I linked the *very same source* in support of Maryland being Southeastern (as well as, by the way, Mid-Atlantic), as is used to support that for Virginia. So why is that considered 'non-neutral' for Virginia?
 * As I also mentioned on the edit page, I changed the citation from Census Bureau to the source used on Virginia's page, the Nat. Geographic IIRC. In any case, I doubt it'd make you any happier to call Maryland 'South Atlantic', as the CB does.
 * 'Virtually every definition of the Mid-Atlantic independent of the Census Bureau's includes Maryland in the Mid-Atlantic.' Again, a state is capable of being multi-regional. Virginia is noted as being both Mid-Atl. and SE in the lead sentence. Pennsylvania is noted as being in three regions, one of which is Appalachia, which certainly strikes me as counterintuitive (although not incorrect). (There is no source for that either, by the way.)
 * 'It's funny that you cite the SGA, since Maryland became a member of CSG East over a decade ago.' Over a decade ago is the blink of an eye in determining whether a state belongs to this or that region. Are states going to be subject to being shuffled from region to region on a decade-by-decade basis? In any case, the SGA no longer exists.
 * 'The strongest arguments defining Maryland as Southern point back to its past prior to the Civil War.' This is not true. I already noted Paxson writing in 1912, half a century after the Civil War, as well as a number of authoritative sources in the last several centuries, as well as some of my own arguments relating to things that happened just a matter of years ago. I'm not going to rehash them if you didn't bother paying attn. to them in the first place.
 * 'Politics, economics, and population density of course play a big role in defining a region. The rapid growth and industrialization of Baltimore from the mid-1800s onward (supported in large part by European immigration) is a huge part of Maryland's identity.' That's why Maryland is both a SE and a Mid-Atl state. If we called Pennsylvania *just* an Appalachian state, that would give the misimpression that it's entirely like West Virginia. However, the fact that Philadelphia is not like West Virginia does not prevent Wikipedia calling Pennsylvania Appalachian *as well as* Mid-Atlantic (and, I believe, Northeastern).
 * Also, again, this would certainly argue in favour of Florida not being a Southeastern state. I'm not sure why you haven't taken it upon yourself to ban people from calling Florida SE in the lead sentence of its Wikipedia page. I've lived in Miami, the largest city in Florida, and it is not any more Southern than Baltimore, which I have spent time in.
 * I'm not sure why you have such a great interest in stopping Maryland being called Southeastern (along with Mid-Atlantic), when this is a perfectly reasonable and accurate description and in fact adds accuracy, and when it is certainly no less accurate than calling Florida Southeastern. (In fact, it is somewhat misleading to call Florida *simply* Southeastern, at least by your logic, because of what Florida is *today*. And, as I noted above, the same could easily become true of Virginia in the foreseeable future. The same, indeed, is arguably true of Colorado vis-a-vis the Mountain West, as, much as Baltimore has given Maryland a [somewhat] different trajectory to other Southern states, so has Denver, Colorado vis-a-vis the other Mountain West states. And yet it does not seem important to you to insist that Colorado be reclassified as...something.)
 * In any case, you seem to be threatening that I can be banned for undoing your edits; I don't know if you have that authority or not, but even if you don't, it'd be a waste of my time to keep undoing your edits. As I asked on your page, is there an authority above you I can speak to about this. Otherwise, I'll let this stand as my argument on the topic. Good day.
 * Toadmore (talk) 05:13, 20 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Southern Maryland is a centuries long recognized region of Maryland. The article (that I linked here, at the start of this post) is flawed, but certainly proves the validity of that region.
 * Chesapeake77 (talk) 20:48, 15 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Only editors from Maryland should decide this. We know our history. This is not a debate about what a non-Maryland resident thinks when they look at a map.   Chesapeake77 >>> ♥ Truth  14:19, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Proposed edit notice
I propose to add an edit notice to the article, with text taken from the lead invisible HTML comment. Please discuss at Template_talk:Editnotices/Page/Maryland if you disagree.

If you think this notification should go to the south/north subpage, feel free to move it (I reasoned that I am not suggesting a change to the south/north text and therefore it falls under general administration of the page, but I could see an argument the other way). Tigraan Click here for my talk page ("private" contact) 11:08, 1 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Agreed. 007bond (talk) 05:11, 2 December 2021 (UTC)


 * I've updated the editnotice to use somewhat gentler and more straightforward warning, and have done the same with the hidden comment in the lede. In the course of this, I noticed that the North/South subpage has really not been used for any meaningful discussion, and had less than 6% the watchers of this page, so I've boldly marked that as historic and changed the warning on this page to one more in line with what we do for other recurring topics: Tell people not to be disruptive, and vow to remove threads that are off-topic. I'll self-revert the marking as historic if anyone disagrees, but it strikes me as an anachronistic system with no real benefit and significant potential downsides. --  Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she/they) 02:54, 25 December 2021 (UTC)


 * People from Maryland should decide this, not people who don't know Maryland and just look at a map to make up their mind.
 *  Chesapeake77 >>> ♥ Truth  14:21, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Koppen Climate Classification For Maryland Has To Go
The Koppen Climate rating for Maryland is completely inaccurate (for "Winter climate"). It is inaccurate for the following regions: Central Maryland, Southern Maryland, and the Eastern Shore of Maryland. This misinformation is posted on (maybe) over a hundred Maryland-related Wikipedia articles.

The Koppen Climate survey claims that Maryland winters are "mild to cool". False. A large percentage of winter days in Maryland are quite cold. A large percentage are also "cool". Only a small percentage are "mild".

A superior substitute for the incorrect Koppen Climate classification for Maryland must be found. The KCC should be removed from every single Maryland-related Wikipedia article.

Chesapeake77 (talk) 19:54, 15 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Update: The Talk Page for the Wikipedia article about the Koppen Climate Classification System has numerous complaints about it's innacuracy in many parts of the world. There are many regional innacuracies pointed out there.
 * I don't want to be a "Crystal Ball" here, but don't be surprised if the Koppen Climate Classification is eventually added to one of Wikipedias several "Unreliable Source" lists or is otherwise deprecated.
 * Chesapeake77 (talk) 11:35, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Possible Article Vandalism
Under the largest city listing, the listed location is "Hong Kong." While this may be a misdirect, there is to my knowledge no Hong Kong in the state of Maryland, and if there is I doubt it is the largest or most populated city within the state. 2600:4040:B03A:BB00:288F:B6DB:F777:49A4 (talk) 17:08, 29 April 2023 (UTC)


 * It was a vandal. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 17:18, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Victoria relationship
Hello Magnolia, there is no reference corroborating the claim Maryland has a close relationship with Victoria, Australia. Albeit we acknowledge that factors and connections exist, I have been unable to find any evidence of said relationship, particularly not any that would merit being listed as one of the few ‘friendship partners’. '''Please Explain. ''' 120.21.38.160 (talk) 14:02, 18 August 2023 (UTC)


 * There's no need to address this just to one editor. I went ahead and removed the Victoria entry from the list of "friendship partners". If or when we have a reliable source that identifies a notable relationship with Victoria, it can be added back. —ADavidB 14:45, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

History Omission
The history omitts the William Claiborne's settlement founded in 1631 on Kent Island and implies that St Mary's City was the first settlement, which is not accurate. 38.124.144.75 (talk) 21:24, 21 December 2023 (UTC)