Talk:Indiana/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Wikipedia Official Policy

From page WP:V

1. Articles should contain only material that has been published by reputable sources. 2. Editors adding new material to an article should cite a reputable source, or it may be challenged or removed by any editor. 3. The obligation to provide a reputable source lies with the editors wishing to include the material, not on those seeking to remove it.

Be bold! Feel free to remove ANYTHING that doesn't have a footnote, because it's not vandalism - it's simply removing prohibited original research. ClairSamoht - Help make Wikipedia the most authoritative source of information in the world 04:10, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Just a small thing to change

Hello; I just wanted to suggest changing a small thing in the page that mentions Bedford as being the 'home area' of astronaut Gus Grissom. While this is technically correct, the (small) city that Gus Grissom came from, Mitchell, and the city of Bedford don't really like each other. I lived in Mitchell for years, and Bedford and Mitchell were certainly rivals, and Mitchell is very proud of Gus Grissom. So I'd suggest changing to perhaps say something like 'limestone quaries of Bedford (which is near in location to the home of Gus Grissom') or something like that. Thanks! ~Adrianna

I thought this was going to be about me for a while there. :D I'll look into altering. For the record, I'm from Jeffersonville.--Bedford 04:39, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks a bunch. 'Lawrence County' works perfectly. :D ~Adriana

Evolution of the Hoosier

Can anyone clear up the confusion to the evolution of the Hoosier? The noun, not the people. toby2080

No. Nobody has ever been able to clear up the "Hoosier question". There is a lot of speculation, some better than other, but no definite answer.

I've heard stories all my life ranging from the plausible to the fanciful. One of the former says that it comes from the pronunciation of "Who's here?" in the southern part of the state. One of the latter says that it comes from a barroom brawl in the frontier days where one of the brawlers' ears was cut off and someone held it up and said "Who's ear?" I doubt that it will ever be resolved.--MarshallStack 04:36, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Instead of "Who's Here?", I've always been told it was "Who's there?", which was what people in the southern part of the state would say when they heard a knock at their doors. --Stainedecho October 18, 2006

In the book:

Kleber, John E., et al. (editor) (2000). The Encyclopedia of Louisville. University Press of Kentucky. ISBN 0813121000. {{cite book}}: |first= has generic name (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

it is stated that the term comes from the 1833 poem "The Hoosier's Nest" by John Finley. That being said, it also states that Finley does not explain the origin of the word Hoosier. The article says that the origins are obscure and lists some theories. The first listed is that the word "Hoozer" (stated to be an English dialect word meaning anything unusually large) evolved to be a description of an unpolished person which could have applied to early pioneers. The second possibility is it being a derivitive of "Who's there". A third possibility listed is that it is derived from the word "husher" which refers to an Indiana settler who can easily defeat an opponent. The fourth possibility listed is that a Louisville contractor named Sam Hoosier favored Indiana workers and that those workers were called "Hoosier Men". --Chris24 02:04, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Additional time zone information.

This newspaper piece seemed particularly relevant to the time zone section of this article. -- Beland 07:24, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Timezone trivia-- For many years Spencer County has been in the Central zone and has used DST, yet St Meinrad Archabbey, located in the county and a major employer of the folk in its area, has used Eastern time without DST. As I am far removed from Indiana these days I don't know how this year's timezone tournaments may have affected Spencer and St Meinrad. Jm546 23:15, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

I am originally from Elkhart County - born/raised in Goshen and lived in Elkhart. South Bend/Mishawaka/Osceola/Elkhart/Goshen have effectively grown together into one metropolitan area that covers two counties, Elkhart and St. Joseph. There is much commuting between the two counties. Now St. Joseph County may be put into the Central Time Zone. This would effectively split a metropolitan area into two time zones and make commuting interesting, to say the least. Of course, Niles, Michigan, is regarded almost as a northern suburb of South Bend and since Michigan has observed Daylight Savings Time for many years, it will also affect people who live in SB and work in Niles, or vice-versa. Indiana's time zones are going to be crazier than ever.--MarshallStack 04:32, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

I added a bit about which counties are now on Central and which are still on Eastern, along with a link to a new timezone map produced by the Indiana Chamber of Commerce. It might be useful to place the map on this page, but I'm not sure about copywrite issues. ONUnicorn 21:35, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

One factural error & update: Only Pulaski [sp?] voted to declare home rule and stay on Eastern Time. (The other county just passed a resolution supporting all of South West Indiana [including the counties that had always been on Central], switch to Eastern.) Earlier this week, after the DOT said they would refer this to DOJ, Pulaski [sp?] reversed the decision, saying the govt office would observe CDT and "encouraged" the county residents to follow EDT. (And at the same time, making their office hours one hour earlier effective the date of the time change.) 168.166.196.40 14:52, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

As a netural observer, the fight over Eastern vs Central makes little sense to me; it's the least signficicant time zone boundary in the country due to the entertainment industry. In Eastern, prime time is 8 - 11 PM; in central it's 7 - 10 PM. 168.166.196.40 14:52, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

One reason that the Central v. Eastern time zone debate is such a big deal for Indiana is that Indiana is so far removed from the "natural" boundaries of the Eastern Time Zone. If one were to divide the world into 24 one hour time zones with the first one centered on Greenwich; then the western boundary of the Eastern Time Zone would come down somewhere around Mansfield, Ohio. Extending it west through rest of Ohio and through Indiana results in Indiana being off a solid 2 hours from "natural" time (i.e. the sun directly overhead at noon) when observing Eastern Daylight Time. Mhojo 19:52, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

"Liberal" vs "Democratic" Northern Indiana

I reverted the change from "Democratic" to "liberal". I am a native of Elkhart County and I can tell you it is most certainly not "liberal", outside the college communities of Notre Dame, Goshen College (both of which have a large percentage of non-native students) and Indiana University - South Bend.

South Bend itself is heavily Democratic but the outlying areas of St. Joseph County lean Republican. South Bend itself has had mostly Democratic mayors but Mishawaka has had mostly Republican mayors. Osceola, which borders Elkhart County, is safely Republican. I worked there for several years.

Elkhart County is as Republican as anywhere else in the state, due in part to the fact that the owners of most of the large RV corporations live there, and the Republican Party tends to be pro-management. I left there in 1999 but at that time the Democratic Party had closed its Elkhart County office. The counties east of Elkhart County, LaGrange and Steuben, are heavily Republican. West of St. Joseph County, LaPorte County often swings between Republican and Democratic dominance. Lake and Porter counties are primarily Democratic.--MarshallStack 05:00, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

There is rather too much POV in the Politics section. (It incorrectly links conservatism to the KKK, fundamentalism and farming. Well, no. The KKK died out pretty fast. Farming took longer but it's mostly gone, and the farmers never were conservative. The state's religion is not especially fundamentalistic. In fact the state is competitive and leans Republican, apart from presidential elections. (When the state was agrarian, those presidential elections were very close indeed). I suggest the GOP tilt in the north comes from the German element, which switched to the GOP when local hero Willkie ran in 1940. Rjensen 12:17, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps, but I was born and have lived all my life in Indiana and speak from experience. I grew up in the South Bend/Mishawaka/Elkhart/Goshen metro area and now live in a small town near Indianapolis. The small towns are very, very Republican. As someone of German descent myself, I would disagree with the comment that the GOP tilt in the north comes from the German element. Many of the German-descended people in the north are Amish or Mennonite, which I come from indirectly. The Amish and Old Order Mennonites (my grandmother was OOM) usually do not vote, and mainstream Mennonites tend to vote Democratic because they perceive the GOP to be the "war" party and contrary to their pacifist beliefs. I left Elkhart County in 1999 and at that time the Democratic Party had closed its office there simply because Elkhart County is so overwhelmingly Republican. As for the KKK, they are still active and hold rallies, though the pro-Klan attendance is minimal. They also have/had a "training camp" in rural St. Joseph County near Osceola that the St. Joseph County Sheriff's Department has received many complaints about. This is near where I grew up so again I speak from experience. And farming is still very much an influence in Indiana, especially in employment policy; the Indiana Farm Bureau is a very strong lobby in the state legislature. --MarshallStack 05:20, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Relatedly, that US 30 thing strikes me as just bizarre. I grew up in West Lafayette, now live in Chicago, and have mucked around all over the state my entire life. It's true that northwest Indiana is its own thing. But Fort Wayne is without question the most conservative large city in the entire state, and I see no cultural difference, aside from the Old Order communities, between northeast Indiana and the rest of the state. So I see nothing special about US 30 as a line of demarcation--and in fact I've never heard of such a thing until I read it here.

(Oh, and by the way, unrelatedly, there's probably an explosion in the Hispanic community in every city in the state. East Chicago is now practically all Hispanic. Lafayette now has a huge Mexican community--there's one elementary-school district in the city where the Mexican community is now in fact in the majority. And there's now even a big Mexican community in Frankfort, of all places. It's one of those surprising but important demographic changes, this recent appearance of significant Hispanic communities in small Midwestern towns (particularly Hoosier ones). So it seems weird to talk about Elkhart in particular in this respect, doesn't it? I'd just go and make the change, but I don't have hard data to back myself up.

--Mrpy 05:23, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

• Yes, there are Hispanic communities springing up everywhere except for here in Western Indiana, it seems. But, per capita, I haven't seen a growth in it like I have in Goshen/Elkhart. When I was growing up there as a kid in the 1970s, it was mostly German/Dutch majority - now it's increasing Hispanic majority.--MarshallStack 16:25, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

• Also, as far as US 30 goes, maybe I should have used US 6, but I'll stick by my decision. I have some experience in Fort Wayne, as I was in the Air National Guard unit there. Incidentally, people in my unit often referred to Decatur - south of Fort Wayne - as "Decaturtucky", and others agreed with me about US 30. Yes, Fort Wayne is conservative, but outside of Bloomington I don't think you'll find anywhere in Indiana that is genuinely "liberal" - after all, Fort Wayne has a military installation and is home to Concordia Seminary, which is part of a conservative Lutheran denomination (Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod).--MarshallStack 16:25, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

• I'm speaking from my own experience as the north viz. the southern part of the state. I was born in Goshen, lived in Elkhart and worked in South Bend. Now I live just off I-70 between Indianapolis and Terre Haute and have since 1999 (thank God we're moving to Michigan next year, this place is hell). Northern Indiana (and again maybe I should have used US 6 rather than US 30 as a demarcator) is definitely more like Chicago and Michigan. This part of Indiana is more like the Deep South - radio being largely limited to country and Rush Limbaugh unless you're near Indianapolis or Bloomington, Confederate flags and all. Kind of like a Jeff Foxworthy/Bill Engvall/Larry The Cable Guy joke come to life - except it's not a joke.--MarshallStack 16:25, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Pendleton a suburb?

Pendleton is a small rural community of about 3,800 people, and it is located about 30 miles away from Indianapolis. I really don't think it should be listed under "suburbs of Indianapolis." Also, I added Zionsville as a suburb.Spuddy 17 07:26, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

The definition of "suburbs" and what is considered "metropolitan Indianapolis" is constantly changing. Putnam County (county seat: Greencastle, home of DePauw University), about half an hour west, is now considered part of metro Indy, at least by the Indianapolis news media.--MarshallStack 05:23, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Indiana Crops

There's corn.

Soybeans are another important Hoosier crop. The two are used in rotation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.8.31.204 (talk) 22:02, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Source for history section

The "History" section was taken from the Catholic Encyclopedia. [1] It's in the public domain, but the source should be noted somewhere appropriate. I seem to recall a template for this purpose, but I can't think of it at the top of my head. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 23:58, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Interestingly enough, it's {{catholic}}. :-) I found it at Wikipedia:Template messages/Sources of articles. The page says to place it near the bottom of the article. Rfrisbie^talk 01:04, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I started a References section and placed the template there. Rfrisbie^talk 02:09, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Timezone map.

Until the other day, the timezone section had an image of a US timezone map with Indiana greyed out to show "Indiana Eastern Time". That map has now been updated to a current timezone map showing Indiana in the Eastern Timezone.

I don't want to revert, or start an edit war, especially since the current map is, well, current and correct. However, I think the old map, showing Indiana greyed out, should still be in this section of the article because it is of historical interest or could be in the future. A while ago I somewhat re-wrote the timezone section, making the explanation of Indiana's timezone controversy past tense, but not deleting it because I feel that, although the days of "Indiana Time" are behind us (for now at least), it is still an important and interesting historical process that people studying Indiana (perhaps school children who have to do a report on a state) should learn about.

If we were going to simply talk about the way Indiana is now, it would be sufficiant to say that Indiana is on Eastern time, and have the current U.S. map someplace near the introduction of the article as it is with most states. We wouldn't need a whole section on timezones. We might, however, have a footnote about the few counties that observe central.

What do other editors think? Should we; 1. Restore the old timezone map with a caption saying this is how it used to be. 2. Use the current map and rewrite the section to be more about the current timezones and elminate a lot of the historical information about how Indiana Time came to be. 3. Have both maps, a sort of before & after deal. 4. Eliminate the timezone section entirely.

Or am I making a big deal about nothing? I'm thinking the best course is probably 3... but would like some more feedback. ONUnicorn 14:25, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Why lose history? Considering the main history section only goes up to 1860, how about adding a subsection under Time zones with a pertinent narrative and image? The narrative could cite the beginnings of U.S. time zones and all the major changes to Indiana time zones. One image just before the most recent change probably would be enough, unless there's an image of the very first set of time zones available. Rfrisbie^talk 14:40, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Gas City; terror:

According to Homeland Insecurity, Gas City's {ice &/or roller?} skate rink[s] is|are more likely to be terror-attacked than Liberty Island. How do they know this?

I'm looking f/ articles about this terror-assessment.

Hopiakuta 18:49, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I would like more detail here; but, I'm ignorant:

The area was claimed for New France in the 17th century, handed over to the Kingdom of Great Britain as part of the settlement at the end of the French and Indian War, given to the United States after the American Revolution, soon after which it became part of the Northwest Territory,

As well as here:

known as the Illinois County of the Commonwealth of Virginia, then the Indiana Territory, and joined the Union in 1816 as the 19th state.

Pioneer Era: 1816-1860

&, there's:

Indiana, meaning the "Land of the Indians,"

Is there a page to discuss how such names affect indigenous Americans? & Indians?

Well, I guess that this does some of it: Native American name controversy.

Hopiakuta 19:19, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

History

Why does the history section end at 1860? Is there an Indiana in the Civil War article somewhere, or should I create one?--Bedford 18:55, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

You realize, don't you, that this will only encourage someone else to ask why the history section ends at 1865?

By all means, create the article. Review the Category:Indiana in the Civil War for ideas of subjects you might want to include in the new article. Scott Mingus 19:11, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

2nd Regiment Indiana Cavalry 14th Indiana Infantry Regiment 17th Indiana Infantry Regiment 28th Regiment United States Colored Troops 34th Regiment Indiana Infantry 44th Regiment Indiana Infantry List of Indiana Civil War regiments Abel Streight Alvin P. Hovey Ambrose Bierce August Willich Battle of Corydon Benjamin Harrison Cannelton Cotton Mill Charles Cruft (general) Charles Vernon Gridley

Colonel Eli Lilly Crown Hill National Cemetery Gideon C. Moody Graham N. Fitch Henry Smith Lane Henry Ware Lawton Iron Brigade Jefferson C. Davis Jefferson General Hospital Jeffersonville Quartermaster Depot Jesse D. Bright John C. Black John Gould Stephenson John T. Wilder Joseph A. Wright Knights of the Golden Circle

Lew Wallace Mahlon Dickerson Manson Morgan's Raid Nathan Kimball Norman Eddy Oliver Hazard Perry Morton Robert H. Milroy Solomon Meredith Thomas Turpin Crittenden Van Camp's Walter Q. Gresham William Grose William Gwin (naval officer) William Harrow William Wade Dudley

There are lots of articles that touch on Indiana in the Civil War, but until you turn the red into blue, no Indiana in the Civil War. Hmmm, red versus blue? Shouldn't that be blue versus gray? Looks like there's a lot of reading to be doing, before the writing is to be done. Have fun; hope you're less confused about color than I appear to be.... ClairSamoht - Help make Wikipedia the most authoritative source of information in the world 06:02, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Indians of Indiana

If "Indiana" means "land of the Indians" readers will probably want to know, "what happened to the Indians?" Where did they go?122.31.178.226 (talk) 13:06, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok, found this on "Ray's" web site. It looks like he's done his homework, but we probably need to find a more authoritative source: Indiana became a state in 1816 and immediately petitioned the federal government for the removal of Native Americans. In 1817 the Shawnee, Delaware and Wyandotte signed the Fort Meigs Treaty ceding their remaining lands in Ohio in exchange for reservations in Oklahoma and Kansas. Two centuries of standing in front of the European advance across North America had cost the Delaware 90% of their original population and left them scattered from Texas to Canada. The 1,000 Delaware in Indiana had no doubt what the outcome would be of a confrontation with the State of Indiana and, at the St. Mary's Treaty in October, 1818, ceded their Indiana lands and agreed to move west of the Mississippi. Between 1820 and 1822, the Delaware left Indiana and moved to the James Fork of the White River in southwest Missouri. Only 100 Delaware remained behind on their small reserve at Pipestown on the upper Sandusky in Ohio. It was around this time that the Kickapoo were moved west of the Mississippi. The Piankashaw and Wea were moved to Missouri and in 1832 moved again to the Marais des Cygnes River in eastern Kansas where they later merged with the remnants of the Illinois. In 1819 the Kickapoo had signed two agreements at Edwardsville and Fort Harrison, ceding all their lands in Illinois and Indiana and agreeing to move to Missouri. Unfortunately this meant that the Kickapoo would be living next to an old enemy, the Osage. Many Kickapoo refused to move and some began destroying the property of the settlers who had already begun to move onto their land. By 1834 most of the Kickapoo had been forced to leave, but some still managed to stay in Illinois and Indiana until the 1880's. Some Stockbridge also remained in Indiana until 1834 when they finally left for Wisconsin. In February, 1837 the Potawatomi signed an agreement in Washington DC giving up their lands in Illinois and Indiana. Some moved north into Ontario, Canada, but others still resisted, the chief at Nottawaseepe was poisoned by his own people while trying to convince them to accept removal. Menominee and his band at Twin Lakes, Indiana refused to sign any of the treaties and in July 1838 was still refusing to even sign the treaty let alone leave. Indiana governor, David Wallace, sent General John Tipton to force them to go. He arrived at Menominee's village on August 30th and arrested every Potawatomi there. Menominee was thrown into a caged wagon. The soldiers burned the village, and on September 4th, 859 Potawatomi departed on what they would call the "Trail of Death". It was every bit as harsh as the Cherokee Trail of Tears. The first child died on the second day and 51 Potawatomi became too sick to continue. By the time they reached Logansport, four more children were dead. The 300 who were sick required a halt so a hospital could be erected. Less than 700 Potawatomi reached the reservations in Missouri and Iowa. In March, 1842 the Wyandotte ceded all their lands in Ohio and Michigan and agreed to move to Kansas where they were to receive a new reserve of 148,000 acres. In July, 1845, 664 Wyandot left for Ohio by steamboat from Cincinnati starting the trek west to Kansas. Most of the Miami managed to stay in Indiana until 1846 when 600 of them left for Kansas. Between 1865 and 1867 the Illinois, Miami, Piankashaw and Wea in Kansas were moved to northeast Oklahoma. The descendants of the Miami who stayed in Indiana still live in their original homeland in the north of the state.122.31.178.226 (talk) 13:29, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Something to note -- the name "Indiana" does not originate with the state's establishment, of course, with the Indiana Territory, created in 1800. Ohio was split off from the large, old Northwest Territory, with the remainder given the name Indiana Territory. It was, in 1800, a vast, vague region almost totally owned (unceded) and inhabited by Indians. It was literally Indian Territory. The taste for "classical" names at the time resulted in Indiana Territory rather than Indian Territory. The point is, the name's origin is a simple description of the land at the time. It is ironic that the name stuck around and eventually became the name of a state -- after the Indian lands had been largely ceded and the Indians driven west. It reminds me of housing developments with names like "Elk Meadows" -- named for what was removed! And Indianapolis was very nearly named Tecumseh, which would have been an even greater irony. Anyway, just wanted to point out the name's origin, it case it wasn't entirely clear that it didn't begin with statehood. An even earlier use of "Indiana" was in 1765 by the Indiana Company, a group of land speculators with dubious rights to a large tract of land on the east side of the Ohio River downstream from Pittsburgh. The tract was called "Indiana". Whether this played into the naming of Indiana Territory in 1800 I don't know; but -- The Indiana Company's claim was disputed by Virginia, resulting in "long and famous litigation" that was not resolved until 1798. The Indiana Company lost and its Indiana ceased to exist. But just two years later the Territory of Indiana was created. So it seems likely that the "old" Indiana was well known in recent memory and was probably a reason for Indiana Territory being named Indiana rather than simply Indian Territory. Thus one can easily argue that the name Indiana goes back to 1765. There's a little info and a map of this old Indiana at Vandalia (colony). I know this is all tangential to "what happened to the Indians", but related since the question is particularly odd for a place named "Indiana". The same question could arise for states like Illinois of course ("what happened to the Illinois Indians?"), but somehow I doubt it comes up as often! Pfly (talk) 20:11, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to take a crack at post-1860 Indiana history. Anyone want to collaborate? GreatLakesdemocracy (talk) 20:06, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

History_of_Indiana#Post-War_Era could certainly use some attention, if you want to work on that.

As far as what happened to Indiana's Indians, there are several articles that deal with this. I can see the value in giving a short version of that here, but there are many answers. There were Indian removals throughout the 1800's, especially the Potawatomi Trail of Death in 1838 and the Miami split in 1846. But there are other stories of Indians leaving on their own accord, like some of the Piankeshaw did when the Virginians showed up and ruined the neighborhood. And a lot of Indians integrated and still live in Indiana, they just aren't recognized because they don't dress like Chief Illiniwek or talk like Tonto. ...and we still have the Indianapolis Indians. Mingusboodle (talk) 16:33, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

"Lost county of Virginia"

Anything of interest here for the Indiana history section? Rfrisbie^talk 19:18, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Not entirely conservative.

This article makes it seem as if there's no one in the entire state with a liberal viewpoint outside of a few cities. That simply isn't true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.218.3.121 (talk) on September 23, 2006

You're right, they do exist, but neighbors keep a close eye on those 17 individuals. ClairSamoht - Help make Wikipedia the most authoritative source of information in the world 21:59, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

You may have intended that as a joke, but there's more truth to it than you think. To disagree with George W. Bush here is considered tantamount to treason.--MarshallStack 16:37, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

The number of Hoosiers who voted for the Democratic Party candidate in a presidential election were 969,011 in 2004 and 901,980 in 2000. :) Wikipedia:Neutral point of view Chris24 04:09, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Even if the question was Republican versus Democrat, Chris, your numbers don't address "outside of a few cities", Chris. Kerry only managed to get 50% of the vote in three counties - Marion (Indianapolis) with 50.57%, Lake (Gary) with 61.03%, and Monroe (Bloomington) with 53.43%. Even Allen County, with the second-largest city in the state, only gave Kerry 36.04%.

But the question was conservative versus liberal. Neither party offered a conservative as a presidential candidate in 2000 or in 2004.

The traditional conservative values say that public officials should protect and defend the constitution, support individual freedoms and property rights, fight waste and fraud in government spending, minimize government size, and promote peace through strength. George W. Bush doesn't qualify as a conservative under any of those tests - although Evan Bayh does.

But in Indiana, "conservative" almost automatically equates with "Republican", and many, many Hoosiers go to the polls and almost automatically vote for the candidate with an "R" by their name - no matter if they know anything about him/her or not. Republican presidential candidates rarely campaign here, because they know Indiana's in their bag automatically, and Democrat candidates almost never campaign here, because they figure "what's the use?"--MarshallStack 16:37, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Because Indiana is an industrial state with a lot of union members, one might expect Indiana to be a Democrat stronghold, but it's not. Before the GOP abandoned its conservative base in favor of fundamentalist theocracy, Indiana elected Republican candidates to every position in the state and federal legislatures, and every elective state office. Has that happened in any other state? ClairSamoht - Help make Wikipedia the most authoritative source of information in the world 05:47, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

• Indiana is most definitely very, very conservative. I'd say probably the only state that matches it is Utah. Except for the steel workers in Gary/Hammond, the vast majority of the population is non-union, and union membership is depicted here like you're a member of the Communist Party or something. Indiana's polls are the first to close on Election Day, and almost inevitably it's the first state in the Republican column. It's also as close to a model GOP theocracy as anywhere in the country.--MarshallStack 16:37, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Indiana is fairly conservative, but I don't think it ranks in the top 5 most conservative states. At the moment, the Indiana House of Representatives is under Democratic control, its U.S. Senate delegation is split 50/50, its U.S. House delegation is made up of 5 Democrats to 4 Republicans, and the Governor was a Democrat from 1988 to 2004. So, at least in terms of political party votes, Indiana is by no means monolithically Republican. Mhojo 20:01, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Mhojo, I'm glad someone pointed to actual data regarding the party affiliation of elected officials. Indiana certainly has a conservative inclination, but the fact that the majority of its lawmakers are currently Democrat should quiet those labeling it a "model GOP theocracy". *smirk* Huwmanbeing 20:59, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Obviously 99% of these comments are obsolete as Indiana isn't quite as conservative as most of you said....it's a blue state as of 2008! 71.201.147.83 (talk) 04:29, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

It's not all obsolete. Look at the county map from the Indianapolis Star. It's still a few, predictable urban areas voting 'blue' while the rest of the rural state votes 'red.' The popular vote was split 50% to 49% in the presidential election. The county map for the governor's race looks very similar, except the popular vote was split 58% 'red' to 40% 'blue'. Based on those two races, the state is still leaning conservative... maybe not as much as before, but still leaning right. It's hardly 100% Republican, but it never was. The question of why the state finally voted for a democrat party president can be debated, but the overall politics throughout the state haven't changed that much.Mingusboodle (talk) 22:32, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Thats true. Besides, the state is still +R7 in the latest Cook Partisan Voting Index, which indicates and overall moderate sized Republican\conservative majority. Charles Edward (Talk) 02:24, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Geography

i've re-edited the geography section so that it is more balanced and covers northern, central, and southern indiana. obviously, there are sub regions within these areas, such as michiana, which are covered under the general headings. Randella 14:17, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

New Sports section added to updated Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. states format

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 Indiana. Please see South_carolina#Sports_in_South_Carolina as an example. NorCalHistory 16:17, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

New Sports section added to updated Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. states format

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 Indiana. Please see South_carolina#Sports_in_South_Carolina as an example. NorCalHistory 16:18, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

We missed a sports team...

I know, I know, it's far from the most important topic! But the founder of the Zollner Pistons of the National Basketball League, Fred Zollner, was alos instrumental in formation of the NBA. The Pistons played in several different leagues, based in Fort Wayne, before moving to Detroit in 1957.

I'd change it, but I'm pretty sure I'd make a huge mess...

Cheers, Scmrak 18:25, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

County roads

I have replaced the newly-added section on county roads with a more concise version. One issue is that county roads are not numbered based on yards from a baseline; the numbers are based on miles. I also am not sure the assertion that it is a confusing system is encyclopedic, or true. Granted, when one tries to put such things into written words, it can seem confusing, but the principle is really quite simple, which I imagine is why it was put into practice. I hope Rhatsa26X will not take offense at this edit and will re-add relevant material if necessary. Omnedon 04:06, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Earlham College

This is a small thing, but I've included Earlham College in the Education section, as I believe its omission to be an oversight. Earlham is small, (only 1,200 students or so) but it's ranked 23rd among 1,469 institutions of higher learning in the U.S. in the percentage of graduates who go on to receive Ph.D.s, even as more than 75% of alumni go on to earn graduate degrees of some kind. Earlham is also among the 9% of US colleges who are granted Phi Beta Kappa charters, and Earlham's been highly ranked by all of the major college guides including the Fiske Guide to Colleges and the Princeton Review. I know there's no need to go on here; just thought I'd make it clear why I made the change.

Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.18.196.92 (talk) 02:27, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Population

Why do you say that the population is not 6,313,520 when the US Census says it is?Brentoli (talk) 01:54, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

No "History Page" so Indiana had a very short history, what about the 20th century? --Margrave1206 (talk) 17:19, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Famous Hoosiers

This list is way too long, especially considering that there's also List of people from Indiana. It needs to be pruned to the most famous and notable. Everyone else should go (after making sure that they're already on the List). It doesn't need to be done all at once, but at the very least I propose that anyone who adds a name must remove at least two. And should justify why the name he added is more notable than the ones he removed. Other than that, let's start removing names that we think won't be controversial. Any disagreement over who should go, bring it here. -- Zsero (talk) 06:43, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

So I'm confused. What is the point of having both a Famous Hoosiers and a List of people? Just eliminate the section and have a link to the list and be done with it. And in the meantime, if someone adds someone to the Famous Hoosiers part of this page, instead of reverting the edit, just add them to the list instead. -- JT^Holla! 00:27, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

The article should have a short sample of the most notable Hoosiers, as an example of the sort of people the state has produced. That's encyclopaedic. A list of the size it's grown to is not. So we need to shrink it, which is work; and the way I propose to do it is that anyone who wants to add a name to the in-article list must remove at least two names, until it shrinks to a reasonable size. That way we may get this actually done. Of course people should feel free to prune the list without adding to it as well! -- Zsero (talk) 00:41, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree, short sample would be ok, but make sure appropriate names are included not just any name!~ But be precise! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.99.2.32 (talk) 00:05, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I think we really need to have two lists: One that is a Top 25 list of people FROM Indiana, and then a separate list of the Top 25 people who weren't from Indiana, but made their name in Indiana. Thoughts? -- JT^Holla! 01:04, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Indianan

I would like to hear other opinions on citing Indianan as a second Denomonym. I reject the reasoning that is commonly used to refer to Hoosiers outside of the state. I am well traveled and have been in all of the lower 48 multiple times and never once have I been called an "Indianan" - always a "Hoosier". Hoosier is almost certainly the overwhelming used term to refer to residents of Indiana. I suggest we remove the denomonym "Indianans". Charles Edward 12:11, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. If it is indeed common outside the state, it won't be hard finding a source. -- Me^Holla! 16:31, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I've never heard the term Indianan used, except by an ill-advised political candidate earlier this month. The ad was universally rediculed and quickly changed to "Hoosiers." Mingusboodle (talk) 16:40, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I just did a google search for Indianan, and I did find a few dictionary entries. The majority of hits, however, were typos that were referring to Indiana, Native Americans, or people from India. I think the word Indianan is worthy of a footnote next to the word Hoosier, but only to warn Wikipedia readers that this term should not be used. Mingusboodle (talk) 16:47, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I've footnoted "Indianan" with the dictionary link and explanation. Charles Edward 16:59, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Floods

Is there an entry on Wiki for yesterday's/ongoing floods? I searched for 2008 Indiana Flood but didn't return anything. If not...there should be! -- Me^Holla! 17:10, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah there should definately be an article on that. Widespread flooding, lots of damage, tens of thousand without water and power, thousand forced to flee their homes. I am going to start the article as June 2008 Indiana Flood. Charles Edward 17:20, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Awesome! -- Me^Holla! 19:30, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

If somebody is interested in nice website, britannica it's here:

State of Indiana, founded 1816, encyclopedia britannica

Abe as famouse hoosier

Would Abraham Lincoln qualify as a famous Hoosier, I am unsure? He lived in Indiana from age 7-21. His residence, or what is left of it is a memorial with a museum about him, Lincoln Boyhood National Memorial. Charles Edward 03:38, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Interesting question, i lived close to the memorial. Famous Hoosier, NO, because he is remembered as guy from Illinois, but hoosier coming from Indiana, sure! Keep in mind Illinois is land of Lincoln!{{{ BoxingWear - BWear - Miranda }}} (talk) 22:42, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Could you just casually link to Abraham Lincoln Birthplace National Historic Site somehow without making a big deal of it? Mingusboodle (talk) 12:46, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

(206) 660-6644 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.28.130.183 (talk) 04:11, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

That table

That table really needs fixing. I'd do it, but I'm bad with tables. xyzzyva

Adding a timestamp for MiszaBot I. [sd] 03:01, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

City & town importance ratings by population & location

I'd like to suggest a rough population and location rule of thumb to rate Indiana city and town articles by importance.

• Metropolitan areas: Top
• Micropolitan areas: High
• Populations over 10,000 and suburbs: Mid
• Everything else: Low

Feel free to adjust individual cases as you see fit. Rfrisbie^talk 14:26, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

I think if a city has historical importance, it should rank higher than population would dictate. Corydon is a prime example of this.--Bedford 15:42, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Of course, I'm just suggeting a "starting point," since the project has over 1,300 unassessed articles these days. Corydon would rate higher on an "Indiana history" criterion. Any "article" should be given the highest importance rating based on all criteria that apply. I also moved this topic to the more appropriate WikiProject Indiana talk page. I started it here by mistake. :-) Most of the discussions about article classification and importance probably should talk place there. Rfrisbie^talk 16:22, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Can you name ANY community in Indiana that doesn't have significant history? Should Milan, Indiana be listed as important because their high school basketball team inspired one of the most popular movies of the 1980s? Should Huntington, Indiana be considered important because it's where the last canalboat docked for the last time? Should Auburn, Indiana be considered important because they made the Cord Automobile there? Should French Lick, Indiana be considered important because Larry Bird came from there? In general, a community's importance is proportional to the number of lives it affects. A community of 40,000 people will have twice as many relatives living elsewhere as a community of 20,000 people. Vatican City's influence is immense, despite the small population, but what is there in Indiana that is comparable? Bloomington, South Bend, and West Lafayette, because their colleges have a national alumni base, and perhaps even Terre Haute qualifies on that basis. Speedway might qualify, and Broad Ripple, as the place where Dave's Mom lives. Columbus, Indiana, because so many major corporations are headquartered there. But those places are surely important anyway, because of their population.

Important cities and towns is meant to be present tense - it's "Who's Who", not "Who Was Who". William Hendricks was the first congressman from Indiana, served two terms, was unopposed when he ran for governor, resigned to serve two terms as Senator from Indiana. But that was almost two centuries ago, and even most people who live in Hendricks County have no idea who he was. He was my great-great-whatever-grandfather, but as they say, "That and a dime will buy you a cup of coffee". As long as you lay the dime atop a short stack of dollar bills, that is.

Forrest Gump would tell you that "Importance is as importance does". Not as importance did. These days, if you would ask hoosiers to put a pushpin in a map of Indiana, showing where Corydon is, most are going to say "Cory-what?" and a majority of the rest wouldn't come within a 50-mile radius. If you try using subjective criteria for "important cities and towns", you're going to end up with an edit war, sooner or later, with someone claiming New Castle, Indiana is important because of "Raintree County", a book so bad that the author committed suicide two months after writing it, and a classic in the sense that, in the last fifty years, the only people reading it were in classes where it was required reading. ClairSamoht 23:56, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

I've never heard of that book, and my mother was from New Castle.--MarshallStack 16:39, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Testing a term paper, shall we? Corydon was the first state capital. It is one of only 2-3 places where a Civil War battle took place above the Ohio River. That is not trivia. Please go look up what trivia is. --Bedford 00:06, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

That's my point. Corydon WAS the first state capital. But it was temporary housing. There wasn't even one elected governor of the state who served a full term in Corydon.

Claiming that Corydon was the site of a Civil War battle is pretty misleading. Morgan's army was there, but there wasn't another army opposing him there. There wasn't anything in Indiana that was worth fighting for. Under similar circumstances, the folks at Newburgh sensibly didn't fire a shot. There was no Union army trying to protect Corydon, because it was militarily insignificant, and the South knew it, too: General Morgan violated orders from his superiors when he crossed the river. He lost 41 troops. A tragedy to 41 families, sure, but at Gettysburg (which is further north than Corydon), there were 51,112 casualties, and at Antietam, there were 26,134 lost in a single day - the bloodiest day in US military history.

Trivia is "something of small importance" - and if the word isn't illustrated with a picture from Corydon, it's because Corydon is of so little importance that they didn't think of it. I don't mean to insult Corydon. It probably is a fairly quiet and fairly safe place. But that's true of Winamac, or Goshen, or Milan Center, or Nashville, or Loogootee, or Lawrenceville. Perhaps you need to check the definition for "important". Someone who has fame, influence, or power is important. Someone who formerly had fame, influence, or power is "formerly-important". ClairSamoht 01:28, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

• Goshen isn't as safe as you may think it is. A lot of people think it's this nice "little" town because of Goshen College and the Amish/Mennonites in the countryside around the city. I was born and raised there, and there's an increasing amount of gangbanger activity there. When my dad was still living, he used to keep the curtains closed so as not to present silhouettes for drive-by shootings. Don't go walking around on the north side of the Norfolk & Southern tracks alone after dark.--MarshallStack 16:30, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

I have been assessing various pages in WP Indiana. I've mostly prescribed to the population guideline, but I did give boosts if I felt the history of the area made up for a lack of population. I tried to avoid rating articles I myself created, but I know I did some.--Bedford 04:38, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm curious as to where somebody got their population number for the "Gary Metro Area". There is no Gary Metro Area, because Gary (and the rest of NW Indiana) is part of the Chicago Metro Area, as is correctly noted elsewhere in this entry. It looks as if somebody just took the population of Lake and Porter Counties and added them together to get that number, but it shouldn't be labeled as a non-existent metro area. 152.228.167.150 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:58, 19 May 2009 (UTC).

Religion

The article describes Indiana as "predominantly Roman Catholic," This simply isn't true. The survey referenced in this section states that only 20% of those surveyed identify themselves as Catholic while 56% identify with one of the various protestant denominations. I have edited the article to reflect this. Does anyone have another data source aside from this survey? Thachize 13:53, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

• it is the largest single denomination though. your edits now imply that baptist is the largest. plus you removed some significant information and figures that should have remained. i'm going to take another stab at it to try to find a better balance. as for resources, that is the only one i found online. Randella 22:18, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

The North American Religion Atlas (NARA), specifies that Roman Catholics comprise 27.2% of Hoosiers, 0.8% are Orthodox, Mormon 0.9%, Non-Christian 1.2% and Protestant denominations as a whole make up the remaining 69.9% of those who are affliliated with a group. This information can be viewed at NARA. Obviously, Catholics make up the largest individual group. jharris693 14:30 21 May 2007.

I seperatated church of Christ from Disciples of Christ. The church of Christ didnt come from the Discipes of Christ, nor are they a denomination or sect of the Disciples. Rather The Disciples of Christ came from the Churchs of Christ. So if anything it would be "...Churchs of Christ (100,000 we of the disiscples of christ)" but since the 2 denominations are not related though they should not be referanced together. Solarguy17 (talk) 23:17, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

This section of the article is very confusing and reads like a bunch of uncoordinated, unverified inputs from a number of writers. For example, it is hard to believe that there are 250,000 Muslims in the state - Wiki's own article on Muslims puts the current number in the U.S. at between 1.3 to 2.5 million. Are we to believe that 10 to 20 percent of all Muslims in the country live in Indiana? I don't think so. I suspect that either the reference cited contains a typo, 25,000 makes a lot more sense, or intentionally is inflating the number for some ulterior motive. Basically, Indiana is predominately Protestant - 2/3 based on information introduced by one of the commentators above, which sounds about right based on my 50 years of experience in the state. Yet, you certainly wouldn't get that impression from the section in the main article which only mentions the odd Protestant denomination (Baptist, Methodist, etc.) individually. This tends to give a misleading representation of the relative numbers of Protestants vs. Catholics. In any case, this section needs a lot of work. Jmdeur (talk) 15:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

William Merritt Chase

I believe William Merritt Chase is a world famous hoosier. Should he be included? Also, in the educational section Rose-Hullman is often considered among the best engineering programs in the United States. 153.104.224.211 (talk) 17:15, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

No. You may add him to List of people from Indiana. In fact, the entire list should be moved there. And no, that belongs on the Rose-Hulman article. Reywas92^Talk 23:25, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

I tend to agree with Reywas92. The entire section should be deleted/moved to List of people from Indiana. If a person is notewothy enough to be named in this article, then s/he should just be incorporated into the normal text. Mingusboodle (talk) 13:07, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

I concur, I have considered doing it myself. —Charles Edward ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 14:32, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

I have removed the section and put a link to the list in the see also section. —Charles Edward ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 22:25, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Namesakes

Would anyone be opposed to moving the namesakes section to a different article, like List of ships named after Indiana, and then putting a see also link to that article? I don't think that it adds much of relevance to the topic of this article. —Charles Edward ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 14:42, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree that the list should be removed, but I'm a little wary of how short the article is. Perhaps the names could be combined into Indiana (disambiguation). Reywas92^Talk 20:56, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Politics

The main article states: "Indiana Senator Charles W. Fairbanks was elected Vice-President in 1904, serving under President Theodore Roosevelt until 1913." Fairbanks retired from the vice presidency along with his more flamboyant president in 1909, returning to his private law practice in the state. Jmdeur (talk) 15:38, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Airports

Purdue Unversity Airport is the second busiest in the state (mainly due to the flight training program of Purdue's Aviation Technology School) according to Wiki (based on FAA information), but isn't even mentioned in this section... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.158.61.140 (talk) 14:29, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Traditionally, the ranking of the busiest airports is based on number of passengers. Purdue's airport does not provide commercial service, so it doesn't have passengers. Additionally, the airports section is under transportation and since most flight training programs take off and land at the same airport, not much transportation occurs at the airport either. Purdue University's airport has the second busiest tower in the state, but it is not the second busiest airport. --Holderca1 ^talk 01:05, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Time Zone/Daylight Savings Time

Is the comment about energy usage under the time zone header necessary? It seems irrelevant to the topic of Indiana. Suggest it be moved to the article on Daylight Savings Time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.191.120.104 (talk) 02:52, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

languages

What determines which languages are listed as spoken in a given state? Are these based on statistics, with only the top-ranked languages listed? I ask because it was surprising to see Ilocano listed as spoken by a (presumably significant) segment of the Indiana population. Am I overlooking a source for this? Cynwolfe (talk) 19:32, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

That's a good point. We can't just go listing every language that someone happens to speak in the state; there are far too many languages spoken. Even the German and French languages that are listed... yeah, there's a state heritage with those languages, and a lot of people speak them on some level, but I doubt you'll find many native Hoosiers whose primary language is anything but English. We should list Algonquin before we list Ilocano.Mingusboodle (talk) 18:14, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

I never looked at that before either. We could probably remove the whole spoken language section. According to this, [2], Spanish is the only language besides English spoken by more than 1% of the population. —Charles Edward ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 20:14, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

updated information. Please.

income, population, climate... Income is well above 2010 avg. - Population has changed since last updates to article - climate only shows rain fall, however, it does not state if the numbers are days of rain as in some of the other states' info or if it is in inches as other listings have. Many of the business structures mentioned in the article have moved out of Indiana, Electronics? (RCA went to Mexico and closed their doors here), Auto (the plants in Kokomo have closed along with a great many dealerships), Drug companies (Eli Lilly stock has dropped again, and they have cut even more jobs). Our toll roads were sold by Gov. Daniels to a private company, in not just out of state - but over seas. More and more companies are leaving Indiana citing they are taxed too heavily here. Please keep in mind that I am uncertin of particular circumstances surrounding these bussinesses which forced them or lured them out of the state. It is very sad to see them continuing to flee. The article is well written but somewhat misleading as to how Indiana is now in 2010. Many of the facts came from 2000 it would seem. Would someone please update the info? An example might be Oregon??? I have no knowledge of Oregon personaly, their article just seemed more informative. See what you think. As you can see I am not the best candidate to rework this article. I am able to get the words out of my head just not to a professional level. Thanks to who ever reads this;)Snips 68.58.57.127 (talk) 21:38, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Uh, the auto industry is alive, if not exactly well, in many parts of the state - Cummins in Columbus and elsewhere in southern IN, Navistar in Fort Wayne, Caterpillar in Lafayette (okay they're building stationary power there, but still), Subaru also in Lafayette, and Wabash National (biggest manufacturer of Semi Trailers in the country) yet again in Lafayette. No doubt, the big three are not major players in the state any more (probably true most places) and Kokomo and Elkhart have been particularly hard hit due to the downturn in the last few years, but the state is still heavily involved in the industry. I also wouldn't be so quick to claim that Lilly's is disappearing anytime soon either. Like most of the U.S., manufacturing jobs are leaving to find cheaper venues with less stringent regulation (in labor, pollution, etc.), and perhaps Indiana has lost more than its share. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.51.66.153 (talk) 21:22, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Old Business: Religion

Looks like much of the old discussion page has been archived. One topic that still irks this readear is the religion section - it still is a bunch of uncoordinated, even obscure bits of information that misses making any coherent statement about the religious practices of most Hoosiers. For example, it is still hard to believe the 10% of all Muslims in the country live in indiana (most sources put total Muslim population in US from 2.5 to 5 million - this article has a quarter million of them living in lil ol' Indiana) - indeed Wiki's own article on Muslims in America, puts the number of muslims in Indiana at around 11,000 (in 2000). Even if that number has doubled in the past decade, it would still be a far cry from a quarter million. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.51.66.153 (talk) 21:33, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

At Will Employment

This article states: "The doctrine of at-will employment, whereby an employer can terminate an employee for any or no reason, is in force." Presumably, this is part of the overall theme of the paragraph where it resides to show how business friendly or presumably labor unfriendly the state is. Of course, at-will employment is (even by Wiki's own article on the subject) generally the rule in every state of the union (with the possible exception of MT and even there I have my doubts it isn't) and has been since 1959 - I know it has been in CA, OH, GA, AL, TX, NY and every other state that I have been employed in for the past 30 years, so it is unclear why this statement pops up here but not in every other state article in wiki - unless someone has a POV axe to grind. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.1.168.113 (talk) 22:04, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

p.s. At will goes both ways, an employee has to give no reason why he wants to leave an employer - you don't see too many labor folks complaining about that half of the rule... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.1.168.113 (talk) 22:12, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

I think it means, although not clearly espoused in the article, is Indiana does not have right-to-work legislation. Right-to-work laws and at-will laws are generally at odds with each other, so it is fair to say that right-to-work states do not offer business the same protections from labor as do states with more simple at-will employment laws. —Charles Edward ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 13:19, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Why is the USA map not showing?

Why is the US map not showing like it is on other state templates i.e. Nevada, California etc. 78.144.249.231 (talk) 06:22, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Presidential election results table

As soon as I post this, I am going to boldly remove the above table for the following reasons:

1. The microscopic font is a violation of WP:ACCESS.
2. Most people don't vote for a party, they vote for a candidate.
3. Limiting the results in the table to the votes for the Democrat or Republican party seriously skews the story for at least three of the elections included. In 1960 and 1964, George Wallace pulled enough votes to move the results, and although I cannot recall what year it was, the same thing happened the year H. Ross Perot ran.
4. What use is a table that only goes back roughly a quarter of the history of Presidential elections in Indiana?

I don't see any use for that table as it is. If anyone wants to talk about a replacement, feel free. Gtwfan52 (talk) 05:55, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Largest Cities; Kokomo

Kokomo's population was 56,800 in 2011. They should be one of the cities with a picture due to this. Refrence: http://kokomotribune.com/local/x1477837217/YEAR-IN-REVIEW-Annexation-Kokomo-recovery-top-2011-headlines --sweepout (talk) 20:03, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

No, Kokomo's population in the 2011 Census Bureau estimate, which is what this section is based on, was 45,494. In any event, the annexation didn't take effect until January 1, 2012, so it wouldn't affect 2011 figures. We'll need to wait until the 2012 estimate is released, which should be sometime soon; the 2011 estimate was released in May 2012.

Kokomo has been added now, and all the other cities have been updated to match the 2012 figures. http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/18/1840392.html --sweepout (talk) 18:18, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Noblesville has also been added, it barely has 55,000 now as well. It makes the rows look even and the section look better overall as well. No other cities have reached 55,000 though --sweepout (talk) 18:28, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

University Notability

In an attempt to avoid listing all 36 colleges and universities located in Indiana, not including the six IU regional campuses and four Purdue regional campuses and the three IU/PU combined campuses, I think a consensus needs to be reached on how to decide which universities should be included in the second paragraph of this article, which currently reads:

"Indianapolis is home to several major sports teams and athletic events including the NFL's Indianapolis Colts, the NBA's Indiana Pacers, and the Indianapolis 500 and Brickyard 400 motorsports races. Indiana has several metropolitan areas with populations greater than 100,000 and a number of smaller industrial cities and towns. The state has several well-known colleges including Purdue University, University of Notre Dame, DePauw University, Butler University and Indiana University. Indiana has a diverse economy with a gross state product of $214 billion in 2005."

My thoughts are that we should use the US News rankings as a guide. Perhaps any Indiana school should be listed that ranks in the top 100 National University Rankings (NUR), the top 50 National Liberal Arts College Rankings (NLACR), and the top 10 Regional University Midwest Rankings (RUMR). This would include:

• #19 NUR - University of Notre Dame
• #56 NUR - Purdue University
• #75 NUR - Indiana University
• #2 RUMR - Butler University
• #5 RUMR - Valparaiso University
• #10 RUMR - University of Evansville

If we expand the list to include the top 100 NLACR, the list would also include:

• #51 NLACR - DePauw University
• #58 NLACR - Wabash College
• #75 NLACR - Earlham College
• #93 NLACR - St. Mary's

I think that having between six schools is a generous amount whereas ten schools is too much for the basic information being given in the paragraph. Thus, my vote is to use the six schools ranked in the top 100 NUR, top 50 NLACR, and top 10 RUMR. City boy77 (talk) 18:51, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

I believe that 11 days is sufficient time for discussion. Since no one has responded, I will presume that either of the aforementioned options will be acceptable and adjust the paragraph according to the first option tomorrow if no one has responded by then. City boy77 (talk) 01:12, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

I find it very odd that perhaps the best undergraduate college in the state is not even listed here. http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/engineering-no-doctorate Iglam (talk) 16:00, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

I too find it odd that Rose-Hulman is not here. So why don't you add it? It would also be nice if you were to simply state Rose-Hulman should be here rather than making your fellow editors go on a scavenger hunt to see what you were talking about. Our time is valuable too you know. Gtwfan52 (talk) 23:39, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't think it's appropriate for the article on the State of Indiana to single out one specific program at a single school. Should we also mention that Indiana is ranked 3rd in entrepreneurship and Purdue is ranked 3rd in Production/Operations Management? It should absolutely be mentioned on those schools' articles, but that's a bit too in depth for this article, particularly since the reference's information is vague (what types of engineering were considered? A general engineering degree, chemical engineering, electrical engineering, civil, mechanical, etc.?). City boy77 (talk) 01:27, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Indiana

I don't know why you would want to change anything about this it is amazing so I don't think you would need to — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pellapea (talk • contribs) 20:36, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Energy

Ball State is producing geothermal energy and should be considered a geothermal plant. While it's not supplying the larger area, it is still a source of energy production. http://cms.bsu.edu/about/geothermal

---

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.68.31.227 (talk) 19:21, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

State Fish

Sorry if this isn't the right place to ask about this but the sidebar on the article lists the "Largemouth Bass" as the state fish. Other sites, as well as the official Indiana state site, and recent email (2014/03) with the state (via the state site) state there is no Indiana state fish. 23.28.24.86 (talk) 23:55, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Really? Lag and spamming on Save. Sorry for the multiple posts.

23.28.24.86 (talk) 23:56, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

how do you get the song?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.224.19.218 (talk) 22:53, 23 October 2014 (UTC) 

Hydrology

So, I ran into an edit conflict when trying to clarify the source for the statement marked dubious. Here is what I was changing it to:

There are over 1,000 lakes in Indiana.

Meanwhile, Sbalfour, the same person who had marked the assertion that there are over 1,000 lakes as dubious changed it to 900 and in the edit summary said they a had a better source, but didn't cite a source (which may just have been a typo). They put

There are about 900 lakes listed by the Indiana Department of Natural Resources.

So, Sbalfour, where are you getting the 900? I admit the Field and Stream reference is rather old and there may be a more accurate or reliable number out there; but I'd rather have sourced data than unsourced. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 18:57, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Nevermind. It's fixed. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 19:02, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Religious Freedom Restoration Act

Is there any particular reason why people have an averse feeling to including the controversy within the article of the state? There is an epitome of reliable sources and per WP:DUE, Wikipedia is mandated to at least have a single section of it in its proportion to reliable sources. It was just recently removed for being 'not notable' despite all the sources. Could someone explain their viewpoint? Tutelary (talk) 21:49, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

@YHoshua: Is there any particular reason you are continuing to revert this piece of material? It meets all policies, such as WP:NPOV, WP:RS, and WP:DUE weight. To attempt to exclude it based on all the media coverage and importance due to businesses rejecting their projects in Indiana, as well as other states rejecting government-paid travel to Indiana, this is a very much lasting even which has profound effects on Indiana, and as such, deserves to be mentioned. Tutelary (talk) 15:05, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

It can be mentioned, but I think an entire section is too much. It's only one of a handful of laws in Indiana that are controversial, and I don't like the notion of compounding new sections whenever a questionable bill is passed. It should be mentioned in the general politics section as an aspect of Indiana politics, but it's receiving too much weight at this point. Scarlettail (talk) 15:49, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

It's not often that such a simple bill within a rather and usually quiet state of Indiana receives such coverage from reliable sources. I merely used said sources in regards to the weight that the section was needed. Though it will likely needed to be updated with the new revised revisions of the bill which aim to sate said critics. I'd also like to hear why you think ...it's receiving too much weight at this point. with regards to its proportion in reliable sources. Tutelary (talk) 16:12, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Its long term implications are likely not significant. It has received media attention in the past week, but that likely will abate in coming days. I also think it would be better to contextualize it within Indiana politics than single it out as some anomaly. Other controversial bills in other states tend to similarly be incorporated into the main text rather than get full sections of their own. Scarlettail (talk) 18:40, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

The section as it currently appears is far too large. I'm not saying remove any mention necessarily, but two sentences and a couple of sources should do it. As it appears one would think it was one of the most important events in the history of Indiana. AlexiusHoratius 19:03, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

The long term implications are the law could be significant, even to the hundreds of millions of dollars lost due to this law. So it's not just a 'Some people are mad about this bill, it's controversial due to that.' and I want a section for it. Business are literally pulling back from Indiana due to this law, other states saying 'no government funded travel' to this state as a direct result of the bill. I honestly think that due to these long term effects, the section as it sits now is a good length to cover all the effects to Indiana--which could be scaled back to only focus on the effects, but given its effect on the state, the reaction, the lasting effects, I think it deserves its own section. It's not a minor thing, it's a big thing to the state. Tutelary (talk) 21:44, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Those are more short term than long term implications. In the long run, it is doubtful that it will seriously impact Indiana's economy or cause political upheaval, especially now that it's been revised. It is already no longer a significant headline in major media outlets. As a result, it shouldn't appear as a central part Indiana politics in the article. Scarlettail (talk) 01:57, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Can you provide me with an example of a single law causing more than hundreds of millions of dollars of lost revenue and not being mentioned on the state's article? That's very much long term implications. Tutelary (talk)

I don't think those are long term implications. Those were just immediate reactions to the bill, and the fallout has stopped already. Businesses only slowed planned expansion in the state, not contracting their current operations. I agree with others that this will appear as a minor incident in just a few months, easily forgotten with those businesses quietly resuming their commerce in the state. Nothing in Indiana has significantly changed since before the bill was passed and after its revision. Scarlettail (talk) 15:50, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

The obviousness for removing this as a section is self-evident. It is but a tiny blip (if that) on the state, and even less of one now that the law has been amended. Perhaps an argument can be made to include a sentence or two in the article, but I would think even that is too much. It needs to be removed.--YHoshua (talk) 02:52, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

There's absolutely no way that this can be considered a tiny blip on the state, this is not some local thing, this caused national outrage, businesses to pull out of the state or significantly reduce their presence, this has very much lasting effects. Tutelary (talk) 15:23, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

No way this should have its own section per WEIGHT. Oppose any mention at all for at least 6 months, and then only if it appears to have some tangible long term significance. Abe Lincoln is pretty important and he grew up in Indiana. Some cackling politicians and activists looking for something else to bitch about sure don't rate more coverage than Abe. John from Idegon (talk) 04:08, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

That's the other stuff exists argument, I'm sure Abe Lincoln doesn't have the equivalent amount of print sources as equal to this event. And do you even understand WP:WEIGHT? Neutrality requires that each article or other page in the mainspace fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in the published, reliable sources. The proportion to this event is exactly huge in terms of Indiana's history, and has garnered rather significant media attention. It's not some tiny 'blip' in the new's media or the like. Also, did you even view my link about how Indiana's potentially lost hundreds of millions of dollars by passing this single law? That's the significance of this law, and has been widely criticized. It's not just single activists or the like, it's pretty much everybody criticizing the good ol' state of Indiana for passing the law. The section is absolutely warranted given its weight in reliable sources. Or do I have to present more than 100 sources in a collapsed column for you to see that? Tutelary (talk) 15:23, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for making my argument for me. There are literally tens of thousands books on the history of Indiana. all that exists on this are a few hundred need stories which obviously cannot even discuss any long view of this because there isn't one. NOTNEWS applies here. At this point there is consensus here for no section. The only dispute is how much if any to include. How about dropping the stick and working on the issue? I've made my position. Nothing now; revisit in 6 months. Others have stated they could live with a sentence or two. others have said they want nothing at all. its obvious you are not going to get what you want. Can we please move forward? John from Idegon (talk) 16:16, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

I vote for no section at all. I could theoretically live with a sentence, but I think it doesn't deserve any mention at all.--YHoshua (talk) 01:50, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Sorry for not responding in an exactly timely manner, Easter, personal issues, etc...Anywho, I honestly don't know if there's anything else I can really say at this. Front page news, financial effects, cultural attitudes, businesses pulling out, and all of that. With the single sentence thing, I don't even know if there's a way to possibly sum up all of what's happened. 'On March 26, a law signed by Governor Pence caused widespread controversy resulting in the possible revenue loss of hundreds of millions and several states barring government-money for travel expenses to Indiana.' Of course, I'm in the minority when I say I want the full section--obviously 4 people to 1, those 4 people are going to get their way regardless of what the other 1 says. Though if we can somehow fit the entire context of what happened into 2-5 sentences, I'm fine with that. I just don't know if it's even possible. Tutelary (talk) 20:12, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

It can have a more thorough explanation perhaps in the History section as an aspect of Indiana's past. For the politics section, just say "Indiana has sparked protests nationally by passing controversial bills such as the Religious Freedom act". Scarlettail (talk) 21:02, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

But it's not technically history, as it's still happening. It's subsection of the law is because it's the law that's most controversial. Attempting to put it under 'history' while it's still happening is kind of iffy with me. Tutelary (talk) 14:35, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Is it still happening? It seems like the episode is pretty much over at this point. Scarlettail (talk) 16:38, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

I think we've talked this out. Therefore, shall we call a question?

Should this article cover this subject at this time? If you have already made arguments here, please just state yes (for some coverage) or no (for none). If you have not been part of the discussion, feel free to add a brief agreement. If the consensus is no coverage, we can go on about our business. If it is for coverage we can then decide what. John from Idegon (talk) 05:03, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

• NO John from Idegon (talk) 05:03, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
• NO - remove this section altogether.--YHoshua (talk) 01:12, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Polling is not a substitute for a discussion There is already an article for the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, where the material and reference sources would normally go if they properly belong. Over 30 state articles would have to be edited and have similar sections added if this is determined to be of such importance to each state's Politics or History. Tinkermen ^{Talk to me} April 11th, 2015

Your statement is not on topic. this discussion is about adding content to this state article about a state law in this state. it effects no other state. so do you have a useful opinion here? John from Idegon (talk) 19:32, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

HIV outbreak

So, the HIV outbreak in Southern Indiana has been all over the news. A state of emergency has been declared, and the legislature has passed a controversial (of course) law allowing counties to set up needle exchanges. There are plenty of sources to be found about this.

With this edit an IP attempted to introduce this information into the article, and was reverted by @Barek: for not including sources. I thought this was ridiculous because I've seen this all over the news, so in less than 5 seconds I found an article to support the assertions and reverted back to the IP's version, adding a source. However, then I thought better of it because Wikipedia is not news and reverted back to Barek's version.

The Modern Era portion of the history section seems to taper off with the economy recovering from the oil crisis in the 1980s. There is currently no discussion of more recent history in the article at all, and Indiana has changed a lot in the 1990s, 2000s, and early 2010s. Now that I think about it, we should probably add a Current Era section to the article and perhaps this HIV outbreak is relevant to add there without violating not news. However, I'd like to get some more opinions first. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 21:24, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

P.S.: Although I agreed with the decision not to include the RFRA debacle in the article on the state; perhaps if we include a section on more recent history we could work a mention of that in; although I'm still not convinced it will have lasting significance; since the "clarification" passed a lot of the groups have ended their boycotts and resumed doing business in the state. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 21:27, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

When I reverted the edit, I honestly had not seen the news stories, but had other concerns with the wording as well. First was the editorializing (mentioning "many, but not all, of these individuals were not exposed to the state's first brush with the disease when it first gained notice in the 1980s and early 1990s" seemed rather silly to me ... I mean, we're talking about 30-ish year gap), and the mention of legislative action certainly needs to be sourced. Like you, I also had concerns about the lasting encyclopedic value.

If retained here with a source (or at History of Indiana or some other similar article), then I think the emphasis needs to be spun around; currently the emphasis is on the HIV outbreak with a passing mention of the legislative action. But the actual lasting impact will be that legislative action - so the emphasis should be on that action (unless, of course, there's an article somewhere specifically about infection diseases in Indiana, then I could see emphasizing the outbreak). --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 22:04, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, that bit about the 1980s and 1990s in the IP's edit doesn't make any sense, and I should have rephrased or eliminated that when I added the source, before I changed my mind.

You're also right about the emphasis; at least, assuming that the legislative action is what ends up having lasting effects. However, I can see the outbreak itself having lasting effects if, say, it changes behavior and drug use decreases as a result (unlikely, but could happen), or if it causes a mass panic of some sort (more likely, but hopefully not). But that just goes to underscore that this is probably too soon to know what, if any, lasting effects will come of this, reinforcing my thoughts that it's too soon. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 22:30, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Indiana/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Main article

Last edited at 00:32, 29 August 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 15:02, 1 May 2016 (UTC)