Talk:Northeast Kingdom

message: Can't find it on the web, but in the 50s, 60s and 70s, it was well known that Aiken was well aware that legislators from the Northeast Kingdom caucused and voted together as a bloc, much to the consternation of the rest of the legislature. Before one-man, one-vote, this was a substantial leg up for whatever proposed legislation they supported. This is why he referred to it as a "Kingdom." For "scenic beauty," he would have used the term "vista" or "park" or somesuch. "Kingdom" denoted political dominance, not "beauty!" Unfortunately the error has propagated itself on the web like any urban myth. A reference in hard copy from the 50s, 60s or 70s will have to be found.Student7 21:29, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If Aiken intended the comment to be scenic, as some have claimed, then the description could extend to parts of Lamoille County and parts of New Hampshire, particularly Grafton, but probably not to Quebec. If, however, he meant the comment as political, as others have claimed, then the description must be restricted to the three counties mentioned which voted conservatively, in bloc, against Aiken's liberal allies, back before one-man, one vote. Student7 (talk) 18:23, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The quote was after Aiken had toured the three county region and spoke to a delegation at Lyndoville's Darling Inn. The term just struck a chord with the residents and has been used since. People arguing about "what it means" is laughable. It has no deeper meaning than a geographical description of the three counties. It's like the loonies latching onto Daddy Bush's offhand remark in a speech referring to a "New World Order" crying secret government conspiracy. Please people, stop looking for deep meaning where there is none  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mack05819 (talk • contribs) 19:31, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Aiken Quote

message: Okay, maybe the quote belongs in Wikitravel, but how often does a small rural area get the attention of a famous organization?Student7 03:00, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: National Geographic Quote

message: It may not be that important to many, but a bunch of the stuff in the geologic section does not seem right; the claim that there were volcanoes involved in the creation of granite and marble in the NEK couldn't be true (since those types of rocks do not come from volcanoes), and the sources provided do not support the claim of volcanoes in the region either.  Unless someone can provide some evidence of those various claims in the geology section soon, I'm going to delete them and rewrite it so it is more geologically accurate. Vter4life 01:07, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I removed marble, which is directly caused by pressure on limestone. That was perhaps concurrently produced from limestone when "great pressure" caused volcanoes. If somebody else wants to put a reference for marble and put it back in, fine. I put in a reference for granite which is from igneous rock.Student7 01:49, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Geologic history

message: If you accept Scott Wheeler's (editor of Northland Journal) interpretation of the Aiken quote, the NEK could be anything up to and including parts of New Hampshire and maybe even Canada and parts of Lamoille county. In the past 4 or 5 decades, it has been generally accepted as a political and geographical unit of Vermont, precisely the northeastern three counties and not including anything from NH at all! Student7 11:29, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Boundaries of NEK

message: Please refer to the following book which provides very accurate details of the term's historical references and sources:
-- The Vermont Encyclopedia (2003) by John J. Duffy, Samuel B. Hand, Ralph H. Orth.  
(Beginning on page 217, through the first paragraph of page 218 includes detailed information.)
REF: Google Books Search:  Vermont Encyclopedia "Northeast Kingdom" 24.60.131.104 (talk) 23:14, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Benoit Quote

message: When indicating an amount per square mile, the correct equivalent would be to display the number per km², not amount per 2.6 km².
1.75 per square mile is 0.676 per km², not 1.75 per 2.6 km².  Likewise, 1.75 per km² is 4.533 per square mile, not 1.75 per 0.386 square miles. mdkarazim (talk) 20:26, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Square mile --> km² 

message: I was born and raised in Vermont, and the use of the term "flatlander" is by no means confined to the Northeast Kingdom. It's used throughout Vermont to describe anyone, other than native Vermonters, whose customary abode is outside of the state. The cited page makes no reference to the Northeast Kingdom at all. Given the fact that the use of the term is not a unique characteristic of the NEK, I think the sentence Residents refer to outsiders, especially those from outside of Vermont, as "flatlanders." should be deleted. AKeenEye 16:43, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Flatlanders

message: Are these statements confirmed? 
Did the 2010 census report the population of the Northeast Kingdom, or is the figure 64,764 really original research obtained from adding the populations of the three counties presumably (but not confirmed) making up the Northeast Kingdom? Parabolooidal (talk) 15:40, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know where the figures came from, but simple addition is allowed and does not, of themselves, constitute WP:OR. I've challenged additions of more numerous places before. And lost! Student7 (talk) 21:58, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Do any of the sources confirm statements in the lead paragraph?