Talk:Poultney (town), Vermont

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

United States: Vermont Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Vermont portal This article is supported by WikiProject Vermont (assessed as Low-importance).

Untitled

I removed the recent addition of History, which was copied just a little too closely from http://poultneyvt.com/history.shtml. It could be re-written, please just don't reproduce the language and structure so closely. older≠wiser 22:25, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Requested Merge

I'm not sure why this is separated out into the village and the town. It doesn't appear that any other VT town has an entry like this.

- I think that is a very good idea; all information except the Demographics and Geography is covered in the town's main article, so there is really no need to have a separate article. Raime 15:37, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For the sake of argument they can be one and the same. the fine line is unperceptable to residents and visitors. This is my wife's home town and she was not even aware that there as any distinction. So let's merge them. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.24.38.29 (talk) 00:44, August 20, 2007 (UTC)

Strongly oppose: there are plenty of Vermont village-and-town article pairs like this. They're not one and the same entity—to the contrary, the village is a small but distinct entity. If it weren't so, there wouldn't be complete Census information for each one. Just go looking at the Vermont county templates and you'll see lots of these pairs. Nyttend 23:27, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But it's true of EVERY village. It's not useful or interesting to mention that the village just has less people than the town. And that's all that was going on here. --Flyte35 00:09, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But notice that we have articles on every census-designated place nationwide, even though they may have nothing except demographic information. Are you going to try to merge all census-designated places nationwide and all villages in Vermont? It sure seems to me that Vermont villages are municipalities, according to state law: unless I understand Vermont Statutes Title 24 Chapter 39 wrongly, they're officially established governments. If they aren't officially established governments, the provision in §1308 that villages may "direct prosecutions for breaches" of their laws is a rather odd idea. As officially-recognised governments, there's more reason to keep these than there is to keep articles on places such as Northwood, Ohio, which have no governmental existence whatsoever. Nyttend 00:24, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Plus, we pay higher taxes here in the village. Surely that should buy us our own Wikipedia page :-) Kylewriter (talk) 22:18, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Origin of its name

The town's name Poultney derives not of William Pulteney, Viscount Pulteney, but of his father William Pulteney, 1st Earl of Bath [1] or [2]. The previous reference contained no word about the town's origin. ~~ Phoe _talk ~~ 20:53, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]