Talk:Essex Junction, Vermont

	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).

Cities

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

Newer stats

Stats and facts on the fair have info on 2010 data. Anything newer?

Essex vs. Essex Junction

The Town of Essex has three voting districts. One is incorporated as the Village of Essex Junction, while the other two are unincorporated. The Town and Village share the same fire department, police department, high school, post office, zip code, phone numbers etc.

Because of the single post office, all address in the Town have their mail addressed to "Essex Junction" regardless of which voting district they are in. This means that a reference to "Essex Junction" does not actually imply the Village, any more than the shorthand use of "Essex" suggests in or out of the Village.

I.E. unless made clear by its context, any reference to Essex, Vermont is ambiguous, and the two articles should make that as clear as possible in the introduction.

(For the record, I have lived in Essex for the better part of four decades) —MJBurrage^(T•C) 23:38, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notable suicide

I sort of agreed with Bladeskater's reversion of suicide, on a technicality: the write-up is not a bio. The article is the "suicide of x," an event rather than a person. Not too thrilled with it's being incorporated into the history, so maybe I should just go along, right?

But to continue, we don't allow bands to be notable, only individuals. This is neither, but an event. Student7 (talk) 01:56, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, interesting; I'd not noticed that. Bladeskater's reasoning is invalid, but you're right that the link doesn't belong here. It's really not a part of the history; but what do you think of inclusion in the See also section? Nyttend (talk) 01:32, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I double-checked just one entry, Amber alert. She's written into the history of her town. However, her name was included in the alert. This isn't known as "Halligan's law" OR anything. It seems permissible not to mention his name, while pointing to the article. Hope this suits. Student7 (talk) 04:11, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2021 merger vote may generate updates to this article

Just flagging that with a new merger proposal up for a vote in Essex in March 2021 this article may need updates depending upon the outcome of the vote. The Government section, in particular, has a table of stats from the 2006-2007 merger voting, and the text has related information. I don't know whether it will make sense to duplicate that table and add info from the 2021 vote - or whether it would be better to replace that table with the 2021 info. I think it's an open question as to whether there is value in having the historical info in this article. The lead paragraph may also need updating. - Dyork (talk) 22:15, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]