Talk:New England/Connecticut discussion

Very Subjective Article
I seem to find objectivity on this site very hard to come by. Anyone reading this particular article cannot help but to walk away from it know tow things, Boston is a capital of something other than MA and CT is filled with NYC 'transplants' as if it is supposed to be filled with Bostonians! It is clear that this article was written by people from Boston and is filled with fiction designed to make the city appear more influental and important than it really is, especially in CT. Someone needs to fix this and other articles to reflect truth, not propaganda.
 * Damn those vile Bostonian propagandists! --AaronS 04:15, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah Boston being the "political and cultural center" of New England is mentioned 3 times.--Loodog 04:24, 15 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Aside from your attempt at humor, the bigger question is "IS Boston a political and cultural capital for ALL of New England?" Some would argue against that.  I cannot see Boston as having ANY influence on CT.  In fact, it almost appears as if the article was written clealry to point out that CT is in the NYC area and that Boston or New England must 'recapture' CT and bring it under it's control.  In other words, make CT love Boston as a de facto captital of New England.  There are a lot of subjective article on this site, but this is one of the more blatant ones that just can't seem to be changed into truth.  Are people in Boston THAT desparate?  Do you people really think that you can win over CT versus NYC?  CT is near NYC, but it is not near Boston.  There is a entire state in between CT and the part of MA that contains Boston.  The only thing that is true is that Boston has hijacked the title of New England to be a synomym for Boston.  I do admit that people in New England do sound alike, but CT does not sound like them.  They speak English. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mrman2 (talk • contribs).


 * The Mayor of Boston actually has a special task force set up to recapture Connecticut via Wikipedia. In all seriousness, though, Boston is the largest city in New England. It is the oldest city in New England. For a long time, it was the largest and most important city in North America. Its influence in the region is entrenched, regardless of whether or not you're a Yankees or Mets fan. Southwestern Connecticut is addressed in the article; so is rural New England, although I would like to see more about Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Western Massachusetts. --AaronS 13:41, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Aren't Salem and Portsmouth, New Hampshire older than Boston? -Acjelen 15:09, 15 September 2006 (UTC)


 * The Wiki articles would say "yes" and "no", with Boston=1630 and Salem=1626 (so "yes"), and Portsmouth "tying" at 1630.


 * Atlant 16:53, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Oldest settlements, but not oldest cities. --AaronS 17:57, 15 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I doubt that either Boston, Salem, or Portsmouth were founded as "cities". "Hey Sam, let's declare our two houses a city!" ;-)


 * Atlant 19:06, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
 * But all three are cities now. The claim of AaronS is that Boston is the oldest city in New England.  A city's age should go back to initial settlement, otherwise New York City dates only to 1898.  The Portsmouth Historical Society states on its website that Portsmouth was first settled by the English in 1623.  Is this wrong? -Acjelen 19:45, 15 September 2006 (UTC)


 * "Is this wrong?" -- Beats me! But I'd probably trust the Portsmouth Historical Society over the Wiki article.


 * Atlant 22:46, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I thought we were done with the "Western CT Debate." This is already addressed in the body of the article. -- User:Malber (talk • contribs) 18:27, 15 September 2006 (UTC)


 * It's apparently time for the next round. :-(


 * Atlant 18:34, 15 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I found it mildly interesting to see it mentioned in the Nashua Telegraph article. This sounds like the same user stiring up the debate. -- User:Malber (talk • contribs) 18:52, 15 September 2006 (UTC)


 * David Brooks (the author of the Telegraph article, a long-time Wiki editor and Wiki admin) and I were both aware of this conflict; we both found it amusing in a Wikiality-sort of way.


 * Atlant 19:05, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Boston can be the largest city in New England(whoopee!) and the oldest, but what does that mean to CT? What does it mean to Vermont, NY or Philly? Philly was a more significant city than Boston and it's population and size shows when compared to a Boston. NYC is the nation's largest and it is older than Boston. It is also next to CT. Do you think that CT would not have influence from a city that is literally right next door as opposed to one that is two states away? The article clearly overstates Boston's importance to CT. It may indeed be the cultural and politcal hub for New England, but that would exclude CT. CT people do not have those shameful Boston accents. CT people speak with class and are a prime example of spoken American English. This article needs to be corrected as a great deal of the subjective points cannot be proven true. Who is going to take the first step in cleaning it up? I tried by taking out the "...cultrual and political hub" crap, but it got reversed back into fantasy land.


 * Okay, the reason this argument persists: New England as 6 states vs. New England as quaint small historic towns with a particular ethos.


 * The former: New England is exactly defined to be those six states. If the character of those six states is no longer monopolized by quaint "small town historic charm" (or whatever it is when people think New England), this reflects a change in what "New England" means.  In which case, Boston is not the cultural and political capital of New England, but rather one of them.


 * The latter: think New England and its character and the term evokes connotations of historic towns, bed & breakfasts, lighthouses, etc... As a preexisting concept in the English language, New England wasn't meant to include suburban NYC and New York transplants.


 * If we are to resolve this, we need to pick one version of New England and let it be the end. Though personally, I would argue that Boston does not exert so much hegemony on even the latter definition of New England so as to call it the "cultural and political" capital.  What effect does Boston and its culture have on Montpelier?  Augusta?  Both of which are easily prime examples of "traditional New England".--Loodog 03:05, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

To be honest, I don't even think New Englanders know what New England is supposed to mean. The media has made it to be a place full or seafood, lighthouses, colonial construction and about the Revolutionary War. I often argue that you can find that look anywhere in the norhteast, probably even more so in places like Washington DC, Philly or just from Maine to Virginia. In fact, one could argue that Philly look like what one would think of when viualizing a New England. There is no real definition. You had "New FOUNDland," "New England," "New York" and "New Jersey." There was nothing special about either place except that the British conquered them one by one.

Morden-day definitions almost always equate New England with Boston and areas around Boston. It also(at least in the Boston area) is assumed that New England is devoted to Boston sports simply because it is the only state with major sports teams and the last major city on the east coast before you hit Canada. As I read somewhere on here, someone pointed out that northen NE was indeed French. Vermont(the name) and it's capital attest to that. How is that NE if it's French? The problem with the artcile is that it attempts to define NE as Boston or as Boston being the center of all things NE when this is untrue. A lot of town in NY state(east of the Hudson) consider thyemselves to be NE. It must be the geopgraphy.


 * If "Vermont" is french, it is pretty bad French. Pfly 07:03, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Vermont is a conjunction of Vert (green) and Mont (mountain)...thus, the Green Mountains in Vermont. ju66l3r 07:30, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

The state of NJ is torn between NYC and Philly. NYC wants most of NJ for itself while Philly wants it's stake also. CT is like that as NYC sees it as a part of it's area and Boston(via the New England title) 'needs' it to be a part of it's market for it's wealth and NYC outlet. Saying the Boston is influential to CT when it is not even near CT, is like assuming that Houston is the de facto captial of the south because it is it's largest city. It is unrealistic to think that. Clearly parts of northern CT identify with NE, but I am not talking about NE identity, I am talking about the artcile overstating Boston's influence and importance in the NE article.

I would be fine if the article just left out Boston being "it's cultural, poilitical and business hub." It sounds like an ad. An ad that is stretching the facts in order to boost the city's image and market. I would say leave that out to start. While Boston is important when dealing with the HISTORY of NE, it is unimportant when dealing wiith the present as it relates to CT. States that straddle between two region are always pulled into both and are usually unknown outside of those regions. In this case, saying that Boston is NE's "it's cultural, poilitical and business hub" to include CT in that(not to exclude it from NE) is absolutley false. Not because I want it to be, but because it is. I cannot disagree that it is for MA, ME, RI, NH and to a degree, Vermont simply because they sound alike and are actually near Boston, but not in it's metro area.


 * I'm a little surprised this is an issue. I've long had the impression that New England is the most clearly defined region in the United States, it being the states of Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine.  I can't recall ever hearing a different definition of New England than that.


 * As for Boston, perhaps the text would be better something like "Boston is the traditional urban center of New England." That would fix the issue of Boston not being culturally like rural New England (its the urban center), and the word "traditional" would put the emphasis on the historical importance of Boston and not so much on present-day Boston / anti-Boston sentiment.  Pfly 05:28, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

That would not work either. The question is why does the article have to insist upon making Boston the focal point as if that city is responible for the other state well being? Why not just leave it at "...Boston is New England's largest city?" That explains it all without the Boston city promos. When the article goes on and on overstating Boston's importance AND taking up the meaning of what New England is or is supposed to be, that is a problem. IN NYS, the northeast and the whole USA, the importance of NYC is always noted. Unlike Boston, NYC IS the center of the world in the USA, northeast and it's own tri-state area around the city. Everyone knows NYC and knows it's importance. Not everyone knows about modern-day Boston outside of sports(like most smaller cities) and even places in the so-called region of New England know very little about Boston. Given that fact, it is impossible that Boston can be a "cultural, business and political hub" for NE. If it is, then I guess that is what Bostonians assume themselves to be. I guess it's because they are the only NE city with major sports teams. We all know that if you don't have sports teams in your city or state, you are not official. Just the same, NYC is near CT, not just the southwestern part as Boston is not near any part of CT.


 * I tend toward a historical and geographic point of view and know nothing about sports teams. I don't think sports teams mean much for the importance of cities.  I'm not from New England and didn't realize there was a pro- and anti-Boston controversy.  I do realize that there are other old and important cities in New England.  Perhaps somthing like "Boston is New England's largest city and has been since the early 1600s.  Other important founding cities include Newport, Providence, New Haven, Hartford, and Portsmouth."  That would hit the cities founded before 1700 that formed the nucleus of the early colonies.  ...or whatever, just an idea.


 * And for what its worth, not everyone knows about Boston in terms of sports. I sure don't. I know they have a baseball team, but that's the extent of my sports knowledge.  There's a football team named for New England.  Is it Boston-based?  I wouldn't know.  When I think of Boston, I think of colonial and revolutionary history, schools like Harvard and MIT, high-tech industry, etc.


 * Finally, I think most people in the US and maybe the world have heard of Boston, and not for its sports. It's not a "small city", it's quiet famous in its own right.  But again, I didn't realize its status in New England was controversial. Pfly 19:58, 16 September 2006 (UTC)


 * This is wikipedia. Anything and everything is controversial. - DavidWBrooks 21:45, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I am a lifelong New Englander, having lived in both Massachusetts and New Hampshire, and having spent most of my life in the rural parts of the region. I have many good friends and family from other New England states, including Connecticut. What this user proposes is preposterous. Many Connecticut citizens identify with New York City, since it is so close to the southwestern part of the state. There are a great many other Connecticut citizens who identify with Boston just as strongly. People from New Hampshire might identify with Manchester instead of Boston. In the northern parts of New England, Boston is but a distant star; but it is still a star around which New England revolves: culturally, economically, politically, historically, and so on. This user's views are quite surprising to me. --AaronS 22:09, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Well you would be shocked at the attitudes of many in New England over Boston. Imagine if you lived in South Carolina and all you heard about was Houston as an example of what the south is? You would know that you cannot relate because Houston is no where around you. In fact, many from SC may not have ever gone there or had a need to. This is the problem with Boston and New England. Boston wants states in NE to assume loyalty to Boston and ASSUME that every state revolves around Boston. It is untrue. Boston was very important in colonial times, but after the revolution Boston had no need to stand out anymore. Boston now DOES have an influence on RI, NH, MA(of course) and ME. These peoples even sound alike, but CT people do not sound like them at all. It has none on CT and very little on Vermont. Any Boston influence on Vermont is likely to come from NH.

I think you could put "...Boston is NE's largest city and a cultural, business and political hub for eastern NE" if you had to. I find it very strange that whoever controls this article insists upon embelshing Boston's importance. Boston is no Philly.

ALso, the Patriots are a Boston team. They let that be known after each of their Super Bowl victories. They used to be caled the Boston Patriots until they moved Foxboro, which is more or less in between Boston and Providence. Boston sports a very well known. The Celtics are the Yankess of basketball, but unlike the Yankees, they have not kept winiing titles. You wrote above what you thought of when you think of Boston. I think of that also, but I never think of it as a hub for NE or even having anything to do with CT. I think Boston as a NE capital is largley a Boston-based propaganda machine at work. I have never seen such an efforst by a city to break out of it's isolation(being that it is no near any other decent sized cities) by going on a mission to 'capture' CT fom NY as Boston tries. If they want to capture CT from NY(they cannot because it is too far away), they may want to build their city up so that it becomes a place to be like NYC. We all know that is very hard to do if LA and Chicago can't do it.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mrman2 (talk • contribs).


 * Mrman2, would you please do us the courtesy of signing your posts to the talk page? It's very easy to do: Just put four tildes (~) after your post and when you press "Save page", your username will be included in a handy Wikilinked form. A timetsamp of your post will also be included.


 * Atlant 23:47, 17 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I think the Boston being the cultural and political hub of New England is an outright falsity. The sentence in the article should be changed to:


 * "Boston is the cultural and political hub of the universe."


 * to more accurately reflect Boston's true importance.--Loodog 18:46, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

I thought that I did sign. It is clear that some editor, if you can call him that, dead set for allowing propaganda to persist in this New England article. What does one have to do to prove this is false? I mean, the best way to build up your city is to attract people to it and offer more attractions. I mean, Boston is isolated so it can only grow but so much. I guess this is why they must bolster their importance on this site. Sad. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mrman2 (talk • contribs).


 * PLEASE SIGN YOUR POSTINGS!


 * Atlant 12:49, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I see that some parts of the article have changed, but it seems as if you cannot get over Boston being some mythical city that rules everything north of NYC. Even the article Yankee seems to want people to think that it means a New Englander. I am from CT and I cannot find ANYONE in my lifetime to eve call themselves or anyone else from CT(or even New England for that matter) a "New Englander." A Yankee has been applied to most in teh northeast. Why ealse would a baseball team call themselves such? What can we do to cahgne this fiction about Boston's role in present New England?--Mrman2 20:17, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Pardon me for being blunt, but your opinions are invalid. --AaronS 21:19, 21 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Compromise is needed. I think the debating is done.  Can we propose some sort of compromise on the issue so the article can be changed to something we can agree on?--Loodog 00:18, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Compromise is needed? But to suggest that Boston is not considered the de facto political, cultural, and historical capital of New England is strange. To generalize into an analogy, there is no doubt that Paris is very different from Marseille and the South of France, and especially from places even farther away. This does not mean that Paris is not regarded as the métropole of French culture and history, even in places where it has no political influence (Belgium, Martinique, Niger, Algeria, etc.). This user has been attempting to make the claim that Connecticut is not a part of New England for quite some time. It's preposterous. --AaronS 00:26, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


 * The debate is dead. No one's convincing anyone of anything here.  Since we still don't have a consensus, compromise is needed.--Loodog 00:57, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


 * In the past when this has been (repeatedly) brought up, we New Englanders have offered to cede Fairfield County, Connecticut to the New York metropolitan area; has that change been implemented in the article? If so, I think that's sufficient compromise.


 * Atlant 12:18, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Trivia: What's the name of U.S. Route 1 as it passes through Fairfield County? -- User:Malber (talk • contribs) 13:14, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


 * What do I win if " Paterson Plank Road, err, Boston Post Road" is the correct answer and I give it to you first? ;)


 * Atlant 13:19, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


 * If there is ever a NH Wiki meetup, I'll buy you a bottle of Alexander Hamilton Sam Adams, you know, that beer named after that guy from Boston who did that thing with the tea. -- User:Malber (talk • contribs) 19:03, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


 * You've got a deal -- thanks!


 * Atlant 00:51, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

It is idiotic as there is a Boston Post Road in NY also! The fact that a poster says that "we New Englanders" have "given away" Fairfield County to NY is compromise enough shows the gual, arrogance and conspriacy that I have pointed out. I point it out, they back it up. When people go to a site looking for information, they hope that they are getting thetruth. Especially if they are children looking to do a paper in school. They should not come on a site and be treated to people's personal opinions about what they think their city 'should be,' they should get the facts as to what it actually is. They should get rid of the editor of this article for injecting subjective propaganda onto the site.

Imagine - you read about New England on here and you think that it is all about Boston all over the place. Once you arrive to western Mass you realize it is not so as much. Once you arrive in CT("I" will give you the Windham County) and you find that Boston is not on anyone's minds, but it is NYC oriented, you would start asking some serious credibility questions about Wikipedia. Readers do not need to read small city ads when they come on here. If they want to know how 'great' Boston is, they can go there or look up some Boston tourist site. Do you see Los Angles trying to speak for the west coast or claiming that it is some de facto capital of the west coast? They don't even do that for California and that is one state! So the nerve of you Bostonians trying to claim other states as yours. Boston has no influence on most of CT and it is no cultural(find something Boston related in CT), business(how? where?) or financial hub(with NYC right next doorto the wealthiest county in the US?  Try again) of most of CT.  This is flat out fiction.--Mrman2 06:57, 27 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Whenever I think of Connecticut, especially the upscale sprawly bits near New York City, I always think of The Ice Storm, the Clintons, and David Letterman "taking the subway in". I also think of Amy Fischer.  I know that's Long Island, but I like to wonder if she'd have picked a more cultured married man to have an affair with if she lived in western Connecticut.  Western Connecticut!   That should be in the article.  A New Englander is someone who uses "western Connecticut" with a straight face. -Acjelen 14:14, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Well one thing that is very clear is that Wikipedia IS NOT a site where the public can chage or contribute to articles, and this site is not credible. Don't come one here and try to promote Boston just because it is not more of what you feel that it should be. The reason it is not more that what it could or should be is because there is nothing else after Boston. I would say try developing a strong city in Maine and maybe people will go there and travel to Boston as an alternative. Much as the peoples in Philly love to go to NYC whenever they can. Philly is a stand-alone city itself, but they must go to NYC, even if they are not in the area. They also go to Baltimore and DC. My point is, Boston is kind of isolated so that is why it is not stronger than what it could be. This is also why Boston likes to equate itrself to New England in order to act as if they have some vast area of their own. This is why they need CT because it is tied to NY and it(the people) do not see Boston as a city of influence(it does not mean that some CT people don't go there, although I have not see many CT plates there when I went).--Mrman2 18:53, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Is Boston a person with wants and desires, feelings of inadequacy and insecurities? --AaronS 12:57, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Boston's feelings of insecurity and inadaquacy in comparison to New York were examined in an interesting way in the HBO documentary about the Curse of the Bambino. -- User:Malber (talk • contribs) 13:14, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Last night in a debate, New Haven mayor John DeStefano made it very clear that CT is in the tri-state area along with NY and NJ! Again, you Boston propagandists, how does Boston have ANY influence on CT? It is not in our area and has nothing to do with us. So now the mayor of New Haven is a liar or fails to realize that Boston is the greatest city in the world? Tell me. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.183.24.34 (talk • contribs).


 * Oh noes! Maine is considered part of the Atlantic seaboard! Delaware is trying to steal Maine from us! Someone call Stephen King!!! -- User:Malber (talk • contribs) 15:27, 10 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm pretty sure we've said it before: The places where the Metro-North Railroad can let you commute to New York City have a definite feeling of facing New York City. But that still doesn't make them not a part of New England.


 * Atlant 16:51, 10 October 2006 (UTC)


 * My facetious comment is supposed to illustrate that just because a state is included in another identified geographic region, doesn't mean that it is not included in the first geographic region. -- User:Malber (talk • contribs) 17:09, 10 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry -- I was replying to 69.183.24.34; I'll change the indent levels to make that more-clear.


 * Atlant 17:15, 10 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Nah, I knew who you were talking to. I just wanted to pile on a more serious response. I'm well aware that from past history the anon user is unlikely to listen to reason. &mdash;User:Malber (talk • contribs) 17:17, 10 October 2006 (UTC)