Talk:Fayette County, Indiana

United States: Indiana / U.S. counties Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Indiana portal This article is supported by WikiProject Indiana (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. counties.

Demographics

There's got to be a better way to phrase this: "10.20% have a woman whose husband does not live with her" suggests that 10% of all households in the county contain married women who are separated from their husbands. I suspect that it means that 10.20 percent of households contain unmarried, separated, divorced, or widowed adult women. That statement is clear but rather long-winded; is there a shorter standard term? (This presumably would be an issue in lots of similar demographic pages.)Vicki Rosenzweig

Website

new website is http://connersvillecommunity.com/fayette_county

co.fayette.in.us is obsolete 69.174.171.59 (talk)

Fixed. Sbalfour (talk) 17:33, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

redacted material for restoration

On 15 Jan 2015, Yamaguchi redacted 1937 bytes of valid (and verifiable) material from the article with the comment "redacted unsourced claim". No talk page entry supporting the decision to arbitrarily delete some unsourced material from the article, and not other unsourced material was made. I'd rather editors spend their time providing sources for such material as they can, or challenge the factual accuracy of the material in specifics here in the talk page, so that other editors can correct or perhaps replace the material. Deletions that lose material from the encyclopedia are heavily disfavored; the material in question is a good faith edit. I propose restoring the material, sourcing so much of it as I can, and adding a maintenance tag for any material not readily sourced. If Yamaguchi can provide any contrary evidence to the factual accuracy or neutrality of the material deleted, here in the talk page is the right place to say it.Sbalfour (talk) 16:06, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've restored the deleted material, and added an "original research" maintenance tag to it. Losing the material is a greater burden in an article that's basically a stub, than waiting for editors to supply citations. If there's a factual validity issue, bring it up here, and let's discuss. I'll look for suitable references as I have time.Sbalfour (talk) 19:25, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

county articles

County articles get short shrift, because every town and city in a county will have its own article, and every event (like a battle, hurricane, drought) that happened in the county will also have its own article. what else is there to say? In particular, a county is a large place, and has a history that in all cases preceded the coming of European settlement and political organization. Its history extends back to the geology of the last ice age before humans appeared on the scene. Hardly ever do I see any of that. Also, a county isn't mostly towns, it's mostly farms, pastures and open space. What about ecology and agronomy? Sbalfour (talk) 17:46, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]