Talk:Alabama/Archive 1

message: An automated Wikipedia link suggester has some possible wiki link suggestions for the Alabama article:
* Can link Mississippi Territory: ...e United States acquired the Louisiana Purchase and the Mississippi Territory, there was much controversy as to whether or not Alabama wa... (link to section)
* Can link provisional government: ...the Civil War.  After the war a provisional government was set up in 1865 and Alabama was readmitted to the Un... (link to section)
* Can link surface water: ...t is water, making Alabama 23rd in the amount of surface water.  About three-fifths of the land area is a gentle plain... (link to section)
* Can link TV network: ...Alabama]] *Alabama Public Television, state wide public TV network... (link to section)
Additionally, there are some other articles which may be able to linked to this one (also known as "backlinks"):
* In CamelCase and Wiki, can backlink AlabamA: ...hat the capitals are followed by a lower-case letter, hence AlabamA and ABc will not be links, see http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?WikiC...
* In El Patrullero, can backlink ALABAMA: ...man who later designed SIN COMPASSION, THE WINNER, CRAZY IN ALABAMA, and THE MARK OF ZORRO.
* In Cecilia Montiel, can backlink ALABAMA: ...ng the level of mediocre films like THE WINNER and CRAZY IN ALABAMA - but her career seems to have been restricted by a stereot...
Notes: The article text has not been changed in any way; Some of these suggestions may be wrong, some may be right.
Feedback: I like it, I hate it, Please don't link to — LinkBot 11:15, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggest 4 possible wiki links and 3 possible backlinks for [[Alabama]]. 

message: Could someone put a disamb link up to Alabama (disambiguation)? Certainly, this topic should stay Alabama the state, but I was not sure how to find the band from here. I'd put it up myself, but I'm not sure how to do it and would rather watch this time. :) --Steven Fisher 10:07, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. --Steven Fisher 01:06, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disamb link please. 

message: The square milage area of Alabama in the sidebar on the right is incorrect, but I'm not sure how to edit the sidebar.  Instead of dividing the area in kilometers by 1.6 squared it was only divided by 1.6.  Square milage listed in the Geography section of the main text appears correct.
*I updated both the sidebar and the text with information from 50states.com. If someone wants to cite a more authoritative source, I'll support another correction. Dystopos 15:56, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Area calculations 

message: Let me say at the outset that some people find my style a bit harsh.  I don't mean it that way, but it comes out that way.  I think it happens because I become impatient with things I can't understand.  I have a tendency to blame the text (not the person who wrote it!) for my difficulty understanding it.  So don't take this the wrong way, Gilliamjf.
You made four changes to the History section, which I would like to discuss here.  My main issue with these changes is that they are too short—or insuficiently wikified—to stand on their own.  Specifically,
1. Added: The memory of the Native American presence is particularly strong in Alabama.
:What does memory mean in this sentence? Certainly not the recollections of any individual.  Do you mean the collective recollections of all Alabamans?  Or, instead of memory of their presence, do you mean influences left over from their having been here?  This sentence needs to be clarified if it is to add any meaning to the paragraph.
2. Added: Trade with the Northeast via the Ohio River began during the Burial Mound Period (1000 B.C.-A.D. 700) and continued until European contact. Meso-American influence is evident in the agrarian Mississippian culture that followed.
:Do you have any sources for this?  A number of tribes were mentioned in the part of this paragraph that was not changed: Cherokee, Chickasaw, and Choctaw, to name three.  Did these tribes trade with tribes in the area we now call the northeast?  The Meso-American reference should be changed and wikified to Mesoamerican.  Then, if you follow that link you'll see a list of Mesoamerican traits, such as the three-stone hearth, for example.  Are these traits evident in present-day Alabama?  If so, then the sentence is a good start, and should be made solid with one or two examples of this kind.
3. Added the word "officialy" in Alabama was officialy readmitted to the Union on July 14 1868.
:It's a minor point, but I'm not sure the word is necessary, even if it were spelled right.  Was Alabama readmitted to the union in some manner that was not official at some other time?  Is there even such a thing as unofficial readmission to the union?
4. Added: The cradle of the Confederacy during the Civil War, Alabama was at stage center in the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s.
:Although this one sentence can't stand on its own, a paragraph on the civil rights movement in Alabama isn't a bad idea.  It should be a very brief summary, heavily wikified (see American Civil Rights Movement (1955-1968)—especially the Birmingham Campaign section, Montgomery Bus Boycott, Edgar Nixon, and Selma to Montgomery marches).  There's more than enough material already in Wikipedia that can be summarized and added to this section -- go for it!  By the way, although the name, "cradle of the confederacy" is claimed by Montgomery (because it was the first national capital of the Confederacy, from its founding on February 4, 1861 until May of that year), you should know that Richmond, Virginia also claims that name.—GraemeMcRaetalk 19:25, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: In general, I agree with these criticisms and I hope that GraemeMcRae will contribute as much to the article as to this discussion. Dystopos 19:52, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the encouragement, Dystopos.  Maybe I'll take you up on it, but I wanted to give User:Gilliamjf another shot at it first.—GraemeMcRaetalk 20:31, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: History of Alabama updates by [[User:Gilliamjf]]

message: please create a link page that allows going to this state page AND allows going to a page for country music group "Alabama" thanks big willy sr --comment made on article page by 64.12.116.202 at 01:10, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see Alabama (disambiguation). Thanks. --TantalumTelluride 01:27, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment moved from article 

message: Hi all! I nominated this page to be a U.S. Collaboration of the Week. This would encourage others to come and concentrate on the page for a short period of time, which I think would be really beneficial. If you're interested in helping, please go to WP:USCOTW to vote for Alabama. ClarkBHM 00:27, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  U.S. Collaboration of the Week Nomination 

message: "According to the Alan Guttmacher Institute"
*Isn't this POV, by definition?  The organization exists to present the facts that condemn one POV and promote another...Sure facts are used but in a manner not much different from that employed by the Republican Party. 
"Alabama requires sex education classes to emphasize "that homosexuality is not an acceptable lifestyle to the general public and that homosexual conduct is a criminal offense under the laws of the state." 
*Where's this quote from?  Alabama law of some sort?  More stuff from the one-sided organization referenced above?  
"While the mandate is not typically enforced in Alabama classrooms"
*I agree that this is true (from my own knowledge of Alabama) but I wouldn't add it to wikipedia on that basis.  Who says it's not enforced?  Who says it's a mandate?
"According to the United States Census Bureau, in 2000, Alabama was home to 4,561 same-sex male couples and 4,167 same-sex female couples."
*Finally something that sounds like factual content on this over-represented subject (considering how short the overall article on Alabama is).
::The Alan Guttmacher Institute has an excellent reputation among demographers for statistical accuracy. Rjensen 07:25, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Alan Guttmacher Institute

message: I think I agree with Brianstop that "dominate" may be too strong a word with regard to evangelicals and fundamentalists in the Bible Belt (Rjensen's "Alabama is part of the Bible belt, dominated by evangelicals and fundamentalists"). (I also think "Bible Belt" ought to capitalized, being the Bible Belt, a proper noun.) "Dominate" implies some lordship, dominion, or rule, and there's no such thing. What we really mean, I think, is that evangelicals and fundamentalists are predominant or prevalent. I'm going to reword it slightly for now, but let's talk about it before we get into an edit war. —LonelyPilgrim 16:24, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Evangelicals and fundamentals in the Bible Belt 

message: *See the current issues with the Tennessee article.  It will be clarified. --Bookofsecrets 15:02, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: Bookofsecrets claims that "southern": is a racist NPOV term that cannot be used. He has a AAA road map he uses as evidence. He seems completely uninformed about any aspect of Southern history but will be making radical changes here. Rjensen 23:29, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Bookofsecrets correctly says he's forgotten all about Southern history.  He has not cited any sources for his outlandish theories because no serious person believes for a minute that Alabama is not southern. Not one. Rjensen 00:18, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The "inbread" vandalism has been deleted. - Centrx 01:51, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  WARNING: poorly informed Bookofsecrets vandalizing aticle 

message: I believe in Alabama it's against the law to play dominoes on Sunday. I wonder if this is worth a mention (as trivia perhaps). Eiler7 15:55, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it's not (even if it were true, which is not verified). Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an indiscriminate collection of information. -- Centrx 01:37, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dominoes 

message: Hello,
I'm tidying up a speech by E. S. Dargan on wikisource and thought as he doesn't have an article page this might be the best place to get some info on him. He spoke, and presumably therefore was a delegate at, the Secession Convention of Alabama on January 11, 1861. I'm looking for his full name, whether he went by E. S. & his dates of birth & death inorder to make an author page for him. His speech is at S:E.S. Dargan on Secession. Thanks for any help you can give. AllanHainey 12:21, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: E. S. Dargan

message: I thought the flag of Alabama was square.  I always remembered it distinctly for this reason.  What does everyone else think?
: The authorizing act doesn't specify whether the flag should be rectangular or square, so apparently it can be either . Most I've seen are rectangular, but I do think I have seen some square ones. —LonelyPilgrim 00:14, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Flag

message: Over the past week some anonymous IPs have been monkeying with the religion statistics without any references. There is no way that 8% of the population (over 350,000) are Scientologists, or honestly even 1%. I am trying to obtain a proper reference for this data, but for the time being I'm reverting to the numbers there prior to August 2 (which match the numbers in Demographics of Alabama). We really need to be citing sources for this stuff. Does anyone know where the religion data came from originally? —LonelyPilgrim 15:39, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religion statistics 

message: When did the state motto change???????
AlaGuy 21:56, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  It didn't according to google.  And an online Latin-English translation of the inserted text gives this  "backwardness, reluctance, evasion."   So I reverted the edit.  Dina 22:05, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Motto

message: Forgive me if I am wrong, but I'm fairly sure there is a mistake in the Presidential Election table on this page. According to this table, in the 1976 election the Republican candidate Gerald Ford won Alabama and with a considerable majority. However I'm pretty sure Democrat Jimmy Carter won Alabama in 1976 and the 76' election Wikipedia page seems to confirm this. This is a kind of serious mistake if I'm right. Would anyone care to check for certain and correct this? 195.93.21.103 16:15, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems you are correct. Jimmy Carter won Alabama in 1976 with 55.7% of votes compared to Ford's 42.6% according to this site, as well as several others. I've made the change and it now reads correctly. Good spot! ​​​​AuburnPilot​​​​Talk 17:14, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK cool. I just changed the background colour in the 1976 box to blue as well, as this appears to be the correct formating as the only other election in which the Democrats won Alabama, 1960, also has the year box coloured blue to indicate that. Thanks for sorting it out, as an unregistered user I just wanted to ensure my suspicions about the mistake were 100% correct and check it with registered users on the talk page before making such a change to the article. Cheers. 195.93.21.103 18:38, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Presidential Election Table 

message: This article has a serious issue with unsourced information. I tagged the page as unsourced and have begun to add citations, starting at the top and working my way through the article. Any help would be great. ​​​​AuburnPilot​​​​Talk 02:51, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It actually is accurate, but worse, is lifted straight from this website: . I'll reference and reword it. -- AuburnPilottalk 01:36, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I really should have read the entire thing first; that site is simply a copy of Wikipedia. It even says Wikipedia is the source....I will find an actual reference. -- AuburnPilottalk 01:38, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems you are correct, as the lowest point in Dekalb County is sea level, not below. There are many other states east of the Mississippi with sea level low points, but I can't find any with below sea level areas. I'll tag it as needing a reference and if nobody can find one, we can remove it in a few days. Always best to give it a shot. -- AuburnPilottalk 01:57, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  References Needed 

message: I do not know if this is what you want but i really thing that Remington college should be removed from the list of colleges. They are not a fully accredited and do not deserve to be posted next to REAL colleges. I have personal experience with this school and there degree is worthless. It is not recconized by any state in the South East. I would not want people to associate this school with the other reputable ones on the site. Just think about it
FB
* Done. --Dystopos 17:41, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Colleges

message: Can someone please explain to me why the list of major cities was deleted.  It makes no sense for it not to be included. AlaGuy 05:15, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the list because, in my opinion, it was too detailed for a general article about the state. Those interested in Alabama's cities can easily follow the links in the table of major metropolitan areas. The detailed table of major cities might be very useful at the top of List of cities in Alabama. A paragraph talking about the five or six largest cities could be appropriate, but I don't think a long tabular list is helpful. --Dystopos 14:15, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK, I've added the table to List of cities in Alabama and added a direct link at Alabama#Urban areas. --Dystopos 14:23, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cities in Alabama 

message: Why is it termed 'Alabamian'?  Shouldn't it be Alabamese? 211.30.71.59 08:52, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I had the same question, except that I assumed it was "Alabaman." I was corrected by a native of the state. It is "Alabamian." (And now I am one.) -- Rob C (Alarob) 21:05, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Being born and raised in Alabama, I assure you it's "Alabamian."  "Alabamese" sounds like a made-up name for a dialect. --Anivron 22:03, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Alabamian / Alabamese

message: Is there a reason there isn't a single picture on this article? drumguy8800 C T 05:19, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't ask me, I had added a few pictures, but, they got taken off because of down sizing?  Yea, I didn't understand it, I just didn't feel like getting into a conflict.  It was really confusing, since what I put up there was deleted, yet, other states articles have things just like it..........AlaGuy 05:43, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This article really doesn't need three maps of Alabama; four including the one in the infobox. Some actual images in place of these would be a great improvement. If somebody has a specific image in mind, drop me a message on my talk page and I'll see if I can take one.-- AuburnPilottalk 07:00, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was referring to actual pictures that I had put on there.  If you recall, I agreed with taking the maps off cause they were weren't necessary.  But, someone took down pictures of places that I had placed on this page. AlaGuy 15:52, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Right, I agree with you completely. I have no idea why somebody deleted your images, but something needs to replace them. -- AuburnPilottalk 15:55, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, I'm adding some pictures.  I put up a picture of the Port of Decatur in the "Water Ports" section, if anyone has a picture of the Port of Mobile, please, take the one I put up down and replace it with the one of POM.  AlaGuy 15:56, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures 

message: The Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. states format has been updated to include a new Sports section, that covers collegiate sports, amateur sports, and non-team sports (such as hunting and fishing).  Please feel free to add this new heading, and supply information about sports in Alabama. Please see South_carolina#Sports_in_South_Carolina as an example. NorCalHistory 13:31, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:   New ''Sports'' section added to updated [[Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. states]] format 

message: I would like people's input on the idea of putting an external link to this page http://state.information.googlepages.com/alabama? Please give some reasons why to put the link or why not to put the link.  Thanks —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.179.119.180 (talk) 20:13, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know the full details of the link, but I've seen it removed all over wikipedia; usually the removal is followed by a spam warning on the talk page of the person who added the link. I'll try to find out why (as I'm not clicking on that link) and leave a comment here. AuburnPilottalk 21:44, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Link 

message: There is now a proposed WikiProject to deal with the state of Alabama at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Alabama. Any parties interested in taking part in such a project should indicate as much there, so that we can know if there is sufficient interest to create it. Thank you. Badbilltucker 16:51, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New proposed WikiProject 

message: After reviewing this article I have decided to fail it for now. I think that it is actually quite a good article, but before conferring GA status formally I think the following issues should be addressed:
*Alabama#Climate: This subsection does not cite sources for the information offered. This section is unlikely to be disputed, but a GA should allow readers to follow the data to the person notably asserting it.
*Alabama#Economy: This section does cite sources, but some claims (like those about tax rates) could stand to have some source(s) provided with them.  
*Alabama#Religion: This subsection, which could become contentious, does not cite any sources for the figures offered. Having lived in Alabama the numbers sound right to me, but we need to follow WP:ATT on this.
*Alabama#Local_and_county_government: This subsection discusses the controversial (in Alabama, at least) topic of home rule. We need to cite sources here because this is likely to be a source of contention in the future.
*Alabama#State_politics: This subsection is okay, but this sentence seems both poorly worded and unsourced: "This ended up hurting Alabama's image and making it out to be a hotbed for racism."
In conclusion, I think that, aside from the issues noted above, this is a fantastic article of good quality. I would strongly encourage involved editors to re-submit once the problems above are resolved. DickClarkMises 16:02, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Good Article review (fail; barely)

message: Ok, the verdict is above. I'm working on the climate section at the moment and intend to work my way through them all. Any help would be great! JodyB talk 03:22, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Prep for GA Re-Review

message: Why are Baptists considered protestants in the religion section?  Is it just to separate them from Catholics, because Baptists are not protestants. Deigo 19:00, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As you know, "protestant" is not a specific denomination. It is a class description of those faiths that developed through the protestant movement. The Baptists of today were preceeded by the Anabaptists of the 17th century and incrementally developed into the denomination they are today. The Southern Baptists, which are the largest of the Baptist groups, especially in Alabama, call themselves a "Protestant denomination." [] I may be missing your question here. If so, please do clarify. JodyB talk 20:07, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Baptists 

message: The article says:
Alabama is one of the most conservative states in the country; Shelby County, in suburban Birmingham, and the city and county of San Francisco, California are the closest pair of greatly populated areas to being political polar opposites.
but I do not understand the italics part is trying to say.  Can someone clarify?  Wendell 04:46, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think someone was just trying to draw a contrast between Shelby County and San Fran. I deleted the sentence because it was worded poorly, had no citation and could be considered original research. From what I can tell, it was added about a year ago. It's interesting but probably shouldn't be here with out sourcing. JodyB talk 11:39, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Politics 

message: I reverted a change in  the population density as found in the userbox. I think it was placed there by an IP vandal but just in case...Your figure would make Alabama the #3 state in density in the nation. And since you also failed to change the density per km 2, I figure you are a vandal. If someone is serious please state your case here and leave a source. Thanks JodyB talk 17:01, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Population density

message: The comments added about Wetumpka aren't sourced and must be (see WP:RS). You will not only need to show that it happened but that it was the largest natural disaster to strike the state. Otherwise we need to remove it. Thanks JodyB talk 20:38, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've moved this info to the geography section and added references.--Alabamaboy 19:53, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Wetumpka

message: I have recently skimmed through or read all 50 of the state articles in Wikipedia.  I have used my experience to development a vision of what makes state articles good or great.  My proposal below focuses primarily on layout (sections and/or subsections) and content of the sections.  It was also clear from my reading experience that the good articles have good supporting articles as a base.
I realize that a reviewer previously indicated that Alabama is very close to good article status and even used the word fantastic.  One should read the Minnesota article then our article.  It is then immediately clear that we have a lot of work ahead.  But I think it will be fun work and create a top quality article.  I do not want to "put lipstick on a pig" and pretend like it should when a beauty pageant.  I appreciate your comments and look forward to working as a team on this first WikiProject Alabama collaboration. Leeannedy 17:55, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: * My first shot at the name section (entitled Etymology of state name) has been completed.  I am personally quite happy with it.  I believe the referencing is also complete.  I have not added a picture although I have a candidate picture (old state seal with "Here We Rest") if the page is looking lacking on pictures after the rework (which I seriously doubt).  Please let me know what you think.  I look forward to seeing your input. Leeannedy 00:15, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: * The section is comprehensive, well-constructed and appropriately linked. My only comment is that it seems rather too involved for an encyclopedia article which will have to cover the entire subject "Alabama". I recommend trying to pare it down to its essence. Although perhaps there's enough there to merit a separate article. --Dystopos 03:36, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Jody, would a subpage for the outline and subsequent discussions be worthwhile?  Or should we archive the existing discussion page to shorten the length of the page?  When we get really started with the work.  I hope the discussion page will be very active. Leeannedy 23:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have archived the first 4 years of the talk page. It now begins at January of 2007 and includes the first comments about the beginning of the project. I would suggest we archive manually so as to save the more important posts. JodyB yak, yak, yak 15:52, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

text: * I've overhauled the List of counties in Alabama article. See Talk:List of counties in Alabama for suggested further improvements. --Dystopos 16:16, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

text: *Should the nickname go in this section? JodyB yak, yak, yak 15:54, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm not sure I understand what significant differences there are in the RI and NC list of counties that is different from the AL list. We could so with a rewrite at the top of the page which I will do shortly but the lists are pretty identical. Could you elaborate? JodyB yak, yak, yak 18:50, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Jody, thanks to the efforts of Dystopos, the list of counties has been converted to a new format.  Previously, the list was completely uninformative.  You can observe the difference by reviewing the history. I have expanded the content of the list significantly as well.  I believe that our first big accomplishment for the WikiProject will be featured list status for the list of counties.  We still have a little work to do (improving introductory paragraphs, fact-checking and verification between references, and appropriate documentation of references). Leeannedy 21:28, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree that the image should be removed, and find it an odd combination (counties and bird). I haven't looked at the copyright status, but I would much prefer separate images. I've also removed the size parameters from the images, per WP:MOS. Unless the size is causing formatting problems, it's best to allow a user's preferences to determine the size. - auburnpilot talk 23:54, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The image doesn't do anything for me, either. The labels are poorly typeset, the bird looks dead, and the pairing is a non-sequitur. --Dystopos 03:29, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting opinions. Actually, dead birds almost always have their heads downward (due to the weight).  The image shows the state bird of Alabama and the outline of the state of Alabama (with counties and major cities), but the connection is "state of Alabama" plus "Yellowhammer state bird of Alabama" gives "Yellowhammer state" (get it? state & bird, bird & state, nickname "Yellowhammer [bird] state").  I didn't nickname the state, so if you don't like the pairing of state & bird, take it to Montgomery?  Sorry, they are paired, odd or not. If you want a real odd-pairing, try showing "Land of Enchantment".  I expanded the license information in the image-description page:  the inset bird image is ShareAlike 3.0.  The image is being used in connection with the text alongside, mentioning the counties and the cities, and oh ya, the Yellowhammer, too. -Wikid77 06:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

text: P.S. - The image was removed again before I even had a chance to save this discussion page (!), so I quit here.  As a rule, I don't waste time in edit wars, since everything on Wikipedia is "Dust in the Wind" testing how people treat each other: "People first, things second" (articles are just fleeting opinions, rewritten before the previous dust settles). If you want good information about a place, try www.city-data.com.  Don't waste your life building sand castles. -Wikid77 06:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

text: * I'm sorry that you feel discouraged over this. Wikipedia works by consensus and the consensus is that even though both represent Alabama, the pairing is inappropriate for this article. It's not that yellowhammers have nothing to do with Alabama, it's that bird photos have nothing to do with county maps. The fact that the other editors disagree with you does not indict them for edit-warring. --Dystopos 13:46, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Vision for FA Status for Alabama

message: * I applaud your efforts and support your proposal. I'll try to help out a little here and there where I can. Since I can't see anything here that should cause controversy, my advice is to be WP:BOLD and let's get our hands dirty. (Regarding the proposed "notable Alabamians" section, one way to steer clear of trouble is to find a reputable third-party prose discussion of notable Alabamians to summarize rather than generating a list) --Dystopos 20:24, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Jody, would a subpage for the outline and subsequent discussions be worthwhile?  Or should we archive the existing discussion page to shorten the length of the page?  When we get really started with the work.  I hope the discussion page will be very active. Leeannedy 23:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have archived the first 4 years of the talk page. It now begins at January of 2007 and includes the first comments about the beginning of the project. I would suggest we archive manually so as to save the more important posts. JodyB yak, yak, yak 15:52, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

text: * I've overhauled the List of counties in Alabama article. See Talk:List of counties in Alabama for suggested further improvements. --Dystopos 16:16, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

text: *Should the nickname go in this section? JodyB yak, yak, yak 15:54, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: discussion

message: Ok, I went ahead and did a bit of work on the intro including moving the "Heart of Dixie" down about three 'graphs. Also some copyediting here and there. JodyB yak, yak, yak 16:11, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Introduction

message: ====List of counties in Alabama====
:I'm not sure I understand what significant differences there are in the RI and NC list of counties that is different from the AL list. We could so with a rewrite at the top of the page which I will do shortly but the lists are pretty identical. Could you elaborate? JodyB yak, yak, yak 18:50, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Jody, thanks to the efforts of Dystopos, the list of counties has been converted to a new format.  Previously, the list was completely uninformative.  You can observe the difference by reviewing the history. I have expanded the content of the list significantly as well.  I believe that our first big accomplishment for the WikiProject will be featured list status for the list of counties.  We still have a little work to do (improving introductory paragraphs, fact-checking and verification between references, and appropriate documentation of references). Leeannedy 21:28, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Geography

message: :I'm not sure I understand what significant differences there are in the RI and NC list of counties that is different from the AL list. We could so with a rewrite at the top of the page which I will do shortly but the lists are pretty identical. Could you elaborate? JodyB yak, yak, yak 18:50, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Jody, thanks to the efforts of Dystopos, the list of counties has been converted to a new format.  Previously, the list was completely uninformative.  You can observe the difference by reviewing the history. I have expanded the content of the list significantly as well.  I believe that our first big accomplishment for the WikiProject will be featured list status for the list of counties.  We still have a little work to do (improving introductory paragraphs, fact-checking and verification between references, and appropriate documentation of references). Leeannedy 21:28, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[List of counties in Alabama]]

message: I have two problems with this image.  First, it combines two unrelated topics.  I would much rather have a picture of a yellowhammer alone rather than stuck to a map of counties.  Second, I do not believe the copyright statement or justification to be accurate.  The counties map comes from the Census Bureau but the photo of the bird does not.  At a minimum, the copyright status is insufficiently explained.  I am removing the photo at least until this has been cleared up. Leeannedy 23:23, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the image should be removed, and find it an odd combination (counties and bird). I haven't looked at the copyright status, but I would much prefer separate images. I've also removed the size parameters from the images, per WP:MOS. Unless the size is causing formatting problems, it's best to allow a user's preferences to determine the size. - auburnpilot talk 23:54, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The image doesn't do anything for me, either. The labels are poorly typeset, the bird looks dead, and the pairing is a non-sequitur. --Dystopos 03:29, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting opinions. Actually, dead birds almost always have their heads downward (due to the weight).  The image shows the state bird of Alabama and the outline of the state of Alabama (with counties and major cities), but the connection is "state of Alabama" plus "Yellowhammer state bird of Alabama" gives "Yellowhammer state" (get it? state & bird, bird & state, nickname "Yellowhammer [bird] state").  I didn't nickname the state, so if you don't like the pairing of state & bird, take it to Montgomery?  Sorry, they are paired, odd or not. If you want a real odd-pairing, try showing "Land of Enchantment".  I expanded the license information in the image-description page:  the inset bird image is ShareAlike 3.0.  The image is being used in connection with the text alongside, mentioning the counties and the cities, and oh ya, the Yellowhammer, too. -Wikid77 06:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

text: P.S. - The image was removed again before I even had a chance to save this discussion page (!), so I quit here.  As a rule, I don't waste time in edit wars, since everything on Wikipedia is "Dust in the Wind" testing how people treat each other: "People first, things second" (articles are just fleeting opinions, rewritten before the previous dust settles). If you want good information about a place, try www.city-data.com.  Don't waste your life building sand castles. -Wikid77 06:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

text: * I'm sorry that you feel discouraged over this. Wikipedia works by consensus and the consensus is that even though both represent Alabama, the pairing is inappropriate for this article. It's not that yellowhammers have nothing to do with Alabama, it's that bird photos have nothing to do with county maps. The fact that the other editors disagree with you does not indict them for edit-warring. --Dystopos 13:46, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments on combined yellowhammer photo and Alabama counties map

message: I've begun some re-writing on the H&E section. Any comments would be helpful. We need to figure out how to deal with private schools and colleges and which should be listed herein. Any ideas? JodyB yak, yak, yak 13:44, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Health and education

message: I am concerned about the section that contains only a list of Alabama songs. If no one says me nay, I will remove this section. One reason: WP:NOT#INFO. Another: The list is far from complete, and likely to get very long if we make an attempt to complete it. For instance, the number of turn-of-the-century songs with "Alabama" in the title is pretty large, although almost no one sings them anymore. They didn't have much to say about the state in particular; as I understand it, there was just a fashion for "Alabama" songs because it was considered a singable name. (I don't have a reliable source however.) -- Rob C. alias Alarob 00:15, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of Alabama songs 

message: Reading the section on "The Federal Government's role in Alabama's fiscal policies" strongly suggests the writer had a specific point to make, which it does in a not too subtle manner. 68.39.174.238 01:52, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I'm not so sure that it merits its own section. I'd suggest demoting it to a couple of sentences in another section.  Majoreditor 18:54, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I looked it over and found it to be very opinionated and biased. The only fact that might merit mention somewhere else in the article was Alabama's status as a beneficiary state (receiving more Federal funding than it provides in revenues). However, I'll leave that to someone else to determine. We're definitely better off without the essay. --Dystopos 02:00, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bias and the Federal section 

message: "From the American Civil War until World War II, Alabama, like many Southern states, suffered economic hardship." Especially in terms of the starting and ending of the hardship, is their a source listed for this? While I will concede the south suffering after the civil war is likely going to fall under common knowledge, I know that various economists and historians would debate over that particular ending date depending on what criteria you use... which is fine to then pick, but wouldn't we then need to cite the source of WWII as the end to the hardship?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.132.136.84 (talk) 23:38, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question on Intro 

message: I am going to remove the "citation needed" flag for the part about Haleyville being the place where the first 911 call was placed.  There are numerous web sites that mention this, including the Wikipedia article on 911. MccullarsJ 15:57, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsourced statement 

message: 27-Sep-2007: Periodically, it is good to perform a sanity check on articles, to see how bizarre they have become.  Typically, much vandalism and partial blanking can be spotted; however, multiple edits and growing infoboxes tend to skew articles over the edge of bizarro.  One of the main growth problems is vanity boxes, where infoboxes and nav-boxes grow to become "more important" than any 10,000 articles combined.  In the case of the "Alabama" article, the top map of the United States had become twice the size of the map of Alabama (!), so I re-enlarged the Alabama map as appropriate for reading.  There is not yet a "USmapsize" parameter to shrink the top map, so the infobox crosses into a vanity-box with a pompous map of the U.S. (with red Alabama) when the subject of the article is Alabama.  Of course, European articles tend to have a small inset map showing a tiny country-in-Europe map, more inline with a sensible perspective on how large a regional map should be.  Due to Alabama's varied geography, with major rivers, mountains, bays, the Gulf (etc.), a larger map of Alabama fits very well describing the geographical features, while introducing the topography of Alabama showing major towns/roads around those features.  Never the less, the large top map of the U.S. is still too big, in vanity-box style, and I think adding infobox-parameter "USmapsize" would begin the process of deflating the infobox and allow more space for information about Alabama itself.  The problem of inflated vanity-boxes is occurring in many subjects, not just U.S. states, and it represents only one area to consider in "sanity checks" about article contents. -Wikid77 23:15, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Wackopedia

message: This title seems strange and may be related to more POV. There is a State Politics section and Federal Politics, a classification I'm not familiar with for describing how the state voted in national elections. At least I think this should be renamed "National Politics", but that seems strange, too.--Parkwells 00:50, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Federal? Politics

message: Ok, I think it's time that we decide whether or not we're putting the CSAs or the MSAs in the Metropolitan Areas table.  Cause, I'm not understanding why people have put Birmingham, Mobile, and Montgomery's CSAs, then suddenly it drops down to Huntsville's MSA and stays MSA after that.  I think any reader would be quite confused by this situation.  Personally, I think it should just be the metro areas since that is the more widely known and understood term used by readers.  But, of course, this is all open to anyone's opinion.AlaGuy (talk) 06:55, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Metro Areas