" 
 ==Cascadian secession/autonomy groups== 
 I will continue to revert the inappropriate deletion of references to historically verifiable Cascadian secessionist/autonomy movements by , as his stated grounds for doing so are fallacious. That there have been and continue to be groups of people in the Pacific northwest who advocate the creation of new geopolitical political entities of various sorts, and that the term ""Cascadia"" is applied to many of them - is a documented historic fact extending back to at least WW2. Asserting that ""there is no facility for secession"" in the US Constitution is irrelevant in the context of that discussion. Secessionist groups exist, and Wiki's business is to document them, just like it documents the existence of political parties, sects, terrorist groups and other notable organisations that posses a clear dogmatic foundation. After all, there was ""no facility for secession"" from the British Empire in 1776 either, but that didn't stop a buch of tax-avoiders founding the United States. There are dozens of other equally appropriate historic examples.   

 :I support this user, and will do so in action as well as text.   

 ::I am missing in the article references for current organized secessionist/autonomist political parties and their support. Aren't there any and this is only an ""intellectual"" movement at this time?   

 ==Thanks ...== 
 Gene, thank you for reverting the deletion of details regarding the historical aspects of Cascadian secession/independence. 

 We in Cascadia thank you!  04:48 GMT, 3 July 2005 

 ==First Use of Name?== 
 The following has been moved from Talk:Cascadia#First Use of Name? when the article was split on  

 Anyway, the name's use for the political concept came from that professor; it's not organic or related either to the architectural style or the town-name; but comes from an amalgam of the Cascades and the idea of ""cascades"" (""all the rivers cascading to the sea"" etc).  Yawn.  The article reads, by the way, as if Cascadia actually exists, e.g. ""places inside Cascadia"", which is pretty misleading.  I was tempted to put a POV tag on it but will give that some thought as to why.  If you'd like I could write up some issues to do with the political logistics of trying to integrate BC into WA/OR (different political and legal systems extant for one thing, unresolved native land claims another, multicultural/Asiana issues and more).  

 :Shockingly, there's no article on western separatism or even western alienation yet. We do have articles on politcal parties like Western Canada Concept etc.   

 ::Found: Alberta separatism, Secessionist movements of Canada   

 == Infobox? == 

  
 Should there be a infobox on this possible state?   
 :No, because not being a state, most sections are unclear. There are no agreements on anything on that info sheet, except probably the time zone and maybe the calling code. Even the official language is up for debate, since Oregon and Washington have none, and likely wouldn't want one. I also have my doubts it would be a Republic, or have