text:
Wikipedia:Researching with Wikipedia
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
"WP:RESEARCH" redirects here. It is not to be confused with Wikipedia:Research, Wikipedia:WikiProject Research, Wikipedia:Researching Wikipedia, or Wikipedia:Academic studies of Wikipedia.
For a quick and simple guide to using Wikipedia in Research, see WP:Research help.
We advise special caution when using Wikipedia as a source for research. Anyone may edit an article, deleting accurate information or adding false information. See also Reliability of Wikipedia.
This help page is a how-to guide.
It details processes or procedures of some aspect or aspects of Wikipedia's norms and practices. It is not one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community.
Shortcuts
WP:RES
WP:RWW
WP:RESEARCH
Readers' FAQ and help
About Wikipedia
Administration
FAQs
Authority control
Categories
Censorship
Copyright
Disambiguation
Images and multimedia
ISBN
Microformats
Mobile access
Navigation
Other languages
Page names
Portals
Protected pages
Searching
Student help
Researching with Wikipedia
Citing Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia
Readers' glossary
Readers' index
Reader's guide to Wikipedia
v
t
e
Wikipedia can be a great tool for learning and researching information. However, as with all reference works, Wikipedia is not considered to be a reliable source as not everything in Wikipedia is accurate, comprehensive, or unbiased. Many of the general rules of thumb for conducting research apply to Wikipedia, including:
Always be wary of any one single source (in any medium—web, print, television or radio), or of multiple works that derive from a single source.
Where articles have references to external sources (whether online or not) read the references and check whether they really do support what the article says.
In most academic institutions Wikipedia, like most encyclopedias and other tertiary sources, is unacceptable as a source for facts in a research paper. Some encyclopedias such as Encyclopædia Britannica have notable authors working for them and may be cited as a secondary source in some cases; institutional policies will vary. For example, Cornell University's online guide to APA style uses citations from Britannica in some of its examples.
However, because of Wikipedia's unique nature, there are also some rules for conducting research that are special to Wikipedia, and some general rules that do not apply to Wikipedia.
Contents
1 Background knowledge for researchers about Wikipedia
1.1 A slightly longer "nutshell" summary
1.2 Overview of Wikipedia
1.3 Notable strengths of Wikipedia
1.4 Notable weaknesses of Wikipedia
1.5 Article quality in Wikipedia
1.6 Editorial administration, oversight and management
2 Special research considerations concerning Wikipedia
2.1 Use multiple independent sources
2.2 Examine an article's history
2.3 Internal links
2.4 Categories
2.5 Take advantage of "what links here"
2.6 Take advantage of "printable version"
2.7 Understand Wikipedia's biases
2.8 Use Wikipedia's social process
2.9 Look for comprehensive review
3 Citing Wikipedia
4 Further help
4.1 Frequently asked questions (FAQ)
4.2 Other help and feedback
5 See also
6 References
7 External links
Background knowledge for researchers about Wikipedia
Potential researchers and other serious users are strongly encouraged to read About Wikipedia for a summary overview and understanding of Wikipedia.
A slightly longer "nutshell" summary
For the most part, Wikipedia has similar strengths and weaknesses to any other encyclopedia.
Major additional strengths:
Keeps up to date well.
You can ask questions.
The history of an article and the process around how it was written are transparent.
Major additional weaknesses:
Articles vary wildly in quality and comprehensiveness.
At any given moment, an article may be in a vandalized state (rare, but not negligible).
Biases are unpredictable.
Overview of Wikipedia
In a wiki, articles are never "finished". They are continually edited and (usually) improved over time. In general this results in an upward trend of quality and a growing consensus over a fair and balanced representation of information.
Users should be aware that not all articles are of encyclopedic quality from the start. Indeed, many articles start out by giving one—perhaps not particularly evenhanded—view of the subject, and it is after a long process of discussion, debate, and argument that they gradually take on a consensus form. Others may become caught up in a heavily unbalanced viewpoint and can take some time—months perhaps—to regain a better-balanced consensus.
In part, this is because Wikipedia operates mainly on an informal process to resolve such issues. When editors cannot agree on content and approach, it is likely to take a bit of time before more experienced editors enter the picture. Even then, on inherently controversial topics, those more experienced editors may have their own axes to grind.
The ideal Wikipedia article is balanced, neutral, and encyclopedic, containing notable verifiable knowledge. Over time, an increasing number of articles have reached this standard. However, this process can take months or years, as each user contributes in turn. Some articles contain statements and claims that have not yet been fully cited. Others will later have entire new sections added. Some information now in the article may be considered by later contributors to be insufficiently founded and may be removed or expanded.
While the overall trend is generally upward, it is not uniformly upward. It is important to use Wikipedia carefully if it is intended to be used as a research source. Individual articles will, by the very nature of Wikipedia, vary in standard and maturity. This page is intended to help users and researchers do this effectively.
See also the article Reliability of Wikipedia, which summarizes third-party studies and assessments of Wikipedia.
Notable strengths of Wikipedia
Main page: Wikipedia:Why Wikipedia is so great
Wikipedia has certain advantages over other reference works. Being web-based and having a very large number of active writers and editors, it provides fast coverage of many topics and provides hyperlinking, unavailable in traditional media.
Also, it often provides access to subject matter that is otherwise inaccessible in non-native languages. Since English Wikipedia editors come from all around the world, the relative lack of non-Western topics found in many Western publications is significantly less noticeable on Wikipedia.
Wikipedia often produces excellent articles about newsworthy events within days of their occurrence, such as the 2007 Wimbledon Championships, Lal Masjid siege, Kidnapping of Alan Johnston, or the Benoit family tragedy. Similarly, it is one of the few sites on the web even attempting neutral, objective, encyclopedic coverage of popular culture, including television series or science fiction. It is also developing across-the-board global coverage of subject areas where for one reason or another existing sources are highly fragmented, including sports such as football/soccer and golf.
In comparison with most other web-based resources, Wikipedia's open approach tremendously increases the chances that any particular factual error or misleading statement will be promptly corrected. As Wikipedia is a collaborative, ongoing project, one may also ask questions of an article's authors. And thanks to its extensive use of hyperlinks and external links, Wikipedia can be an excellent guide to other related material, both on and off Wiki.
Notable weaknesses of Wikipedia
Main page: Wikipedia:Why Wikipedia is not so great
Wikipedia's most dramatic weaknesses are closely associated with its greatest strengths. Wikipedia's radical openness means that any given article may be, at any given moment, in a bad state: for example, it could be in the middle of a large edit or it could have been recently vandalized. While blatant vandalism is usually easily spotted and rapidly corrected, Wikipedia is certainly more subject to subtle vandalism and deliberate factual errors than a typical reference work.
Also, much as Wikipedia can rapidly produce articles on timely topics, it is also subject to remarkable oversights and omissions. There is no systematic process to make sure that "obviously important" topics are written about, so at any given time Wikipedia may be wildly out of balance in the relative attention paid to two different topics. For example, it is far more likely that the English-language Wikipedia will have at least some material about any given small U.S. village than about a given moderately-sized city in sub-Saharan Africa.
Another closely-related issue is that particular Wikipedia articles (or series of related articles) are liable to be incomplete in ways that would be unusual in a more tightly-controlled reference work. Sometimes this is obvious (as with a stub article) but other times it may be subtle: one side of a controversial issue may be excellently presented, while the other is barely mentioned; a portion of someone's life (not always the most notable portion) may be covered in detail, while other aspects may be presented only sketchily or not at all; coverage of a country's history may focus on the incidents that drew international attention, or may simply reflect the interest and expertise of some individual writer.
Another problem with a lot of content on Wikipedia is that many contributors do not cite their sources—something that makes it hard for the reader to judge the credibility of what is written. As of 2010, this problem has almost certainly been diminishing over the last several years, but it has not gone away.
Article quality in Wikipedia
Main article: Reliability of Wikipedia
Wikipedia is a wiki—a collaborative, open-source medium. Just as human knowledge evolves, so does our wiki coverage of it. Wiki articles are continually edited and improved over time, and in general this results in an upward trend of quality and a growing consensus over a fair balanced representation of information. It will tend to gain citations, new sections, and so forth. Dubious statements tend to be removed over time, but they may have a long life before they are removed.
However, few articles are of encyclopedic quality from the start. Indeed, many articles commence their lives as partisan drafts, and it may take a long process of discussion, debate, and argument to yield a consensus form. Other articles may, for a while, become caught up in a heavily unbalanced viewpoint, and it can take some time to restore a balanced consensus. Wikipedia has various processes to reach consensus about an article, including mechanisms to bring in broader participation to controversial articles.
The ideal Wikipedia article is neutral, referenced, and encyclopedic, containing notable, verifiable knowledge. An increasing number of articles reach this standard over time. Because this is an open wiki, there is no guarantee that a featured article retains its quality over time, and of course an older featured article does not magically improve as Wikipedia's standards generally rise. As of August 2006, 19% of one-time feature articles degraded, or failed to rise with the general standards, to the point of losing their featured status.
Keep in mind that an encyclopedia is intended to be a starting point for serious research, not an endpoint. Though many casual inquiries will be satisfied merely by referring to Wikipedia, you will learn more by accessing the print and online resources we reference. We encourage you to verify our content by using independent sources. We also invite you to contribute back by fixing any errors you may find and adding relevant material that will be of interest to future researchers.
Editorial administration, oversight and management
Main page: Wikipedia:Administration § Human and legal administration
Further information: Wikipedia:Editorial oversight and control
The Wikipedia community is largely self-organising, so that anyone may build a reputation as a competent editor and become involved in any role they may choose, subject to peer approval. Individuals often will choose to become involved in specialized tasks, such as reviewing articles at others' request, watching current edits for vandalism, or watching newly created articles for quality control purposes, or similar roles. Editors who find that editorial administrator responsibility would benefit their ability to help the Wikipedia community may ask their peers in the community for agreement to undertake such roles. This approval process helps to create and maintain a structure which enforces meritocracy and communal standards of editorship and conduct. Administrative and other similar roles are achieved only after a nomination process and a poll that shows at least 75-80% approval, a standard which tends to ensure a high level of experience, trust, and familiarity across a broad front of projects within Wikipedia.
A variety of software assisted systems and automated programs help several hundred editors to watch for problematic edits and editors. An arbitration committee sits at the top of all editor conduct disputes,[1] and its members are elected by an established enquiry and decision-making process in which all regular editors can equally participate.
Special research considerations concerning Wikipedia
Use multiple independent sources
Because Wikipedia is licensed under the GFDL, its content is often reproduced, especially online. Researchers should be especially careful of the FUTON bias ("Full Text On the Net" bias) and ensure that a second article appearing to confirm a Wikipedia article is not (for example) simply a copy of an earlier version. One place to look for additional sources to use in assessing the quality of a Wikipedia article is to look at the sources it cites. An article that faithfully reflects the information and intent of a large number of high quality sources is likely to be a very reliable indicator of the current state of knowledge on a subject. An article with fewer or no sources listed or sources of lower quality may not reflect a researcher's desired high quality. The only way to ensure the article faithfully reflects the information in high quality sources is to read and understand the cited sources and perhaps others. Often at the least a Wikipedia article will be an excellent overview of a given subject, making it easier to understand the cited sources and know what type of information to look for.
Examine an article's history
Main page: Wikipedia:How to read an article history
The process of creating Wikipedia is radically open. As a result, unlike most reference works, it is possible that, even for a generally excellent and stable article, the latest version at any given moment may have been subject to recent edits which are not of the same quality as the rest of the article.
However, unlike most reference works, you can access the history of the article (previous versions and change comments) and the discussion between the editors who created it. Often, if you have questions about an article or are looking to do in-depth research on a subject, reading the history and talk pages gives you further insight into why the article says what it says and which points of the article (if any) are in dispute and may particularly merit further research.
Internal links
Wikipedia breathes new life into one of the initial dreams of the World Wide Web: hyperlinks. Hyperlinks allow Wikipedia authors to link any word or phrase to another Wikipedia article, often providing annotations of great value. Background information to an article no longer needs to be limited or even produced by the author of the article. This method has proved to have major limitations on the Internet as a whole, because for a variety of reasons links are prone to quickly become obsolete. However, internal links within Wikipedia can be made with confidence, and so Wikipedia serves a web of mutually supporting information.
Some articles are probably over-linked with important links liable to be lost like needles in a haystack. Also, someone may have linked a word without looking to see whether it leads to anything useful: you may follow up a link and find nothing more than what you just read, or even find an article on an unrelated meaning of the same word. In general, this problem is less common in the English-language Wikipedia than in Wikipedias in some other languages.
Categories
Wikipedia has had its own user defined category system (folksonomy) since the beginning of 2004. The category system is a collaborative categorization system using freely chosen keywords by all contributors to Wikipedia. This feature allows researchers to navigate Wikipedia via categories, which can be very useful.
Virtually all articles now have some form of categorization; however, the quality of this can be highly variable. In many topic areas contributors have created detailed and well-organized categorization; in other topic areas, categorization has occurred in a more ad hoc fashion and is sometimes poorly done.
In all categorized articles, you should be able to find a list of categories at the very bottom of that article.
Take advantage of "what links here"
One of the lesser known, but extremely useful, techniques for researching with Wikipedia is the effective use of the "What links here" link which appears on the left side of the screen, as the first item in the box marked "toolbox". This will give you a complete list of other Wikipedia articles which link to the current article. Even if the article you are looking at is a stub—or, more remarkably, if it is a blank article that has not yet been started—numerous related articles may be easily accessible through this feature. Sometimes these backward links will show you ways in which the article you started from is incomplete in one area or another.
Take advantage of "printable version"
Another feature of the "toolbox" is the "Printable version". Use it whenever you want to print articles for a printer-friendly version of the article. Browsers, such as Mozilla Firefox, that recognize the media print will automatically apply the printable version when printing with the default Monobook stylesheet.
Understand Wikipedia's biases
No good scholar expects any given reference work to be truly unbiased. Instead, one comes to understand the expected bias of a particular work. For example, in looking at the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica, one expects to find some Anglocentric perspectives and attitudes about race, ethnicity, sex, and sexuality that by today's standards seem prudish and perhaps bigoted. In using Collier's Encyclopedia, one should expect a rather Americentric perspective (and probably a lesser degree of scholarship than in Britannica, but a more easily readable style).
Unlike some reference works, Wikipedia's biases are inconsistent. Wikipedians come from all over the world and all walks of life. While we strive to have articles fit a neutral point of view, many articles are not yet there. In fact, two articles on related subjects may have been written by different people and reflect different biases. Even within a single article radically different or conflicting biases may be found. It is also a matter of contention whether certain views are described in a neutral manner.
In this respect, Wikipedia is more like a library (or like the World Wide Web itself) than like a typical reference work. The mere fact that a book is in the library is no guarantee against bias or misinformation. The same can be said of Wikipedia articles. This does not make them useless, it just means that they should be approached differently than one approaches a typical reference work.
Use Wikipedia's social process
Main pages: Wikipedia:Who writes Wikipedia and Wikipedia:A researcher's guide to discussion pages
Wikipedia is not just an encyclopedia—it is also an immense community of active contributors, or Wikipedians. In the history section of each article, you can find out which users contributed what material to an article. In addition, each article has a talk page. If you have questions about the article, asking on its talk page or the talk page of the users who contributed the text will often get your question answered. Then you and the contributor may update the article to make it clearer for the next researcher.
Probably the most general approach to this is to first put your question on the talk page of the appropriate article, then put a note on the talk page of the relevant contributor or contributors calling their attention to your question.
Questions like this are often very useful to the refinement of articles. If you have a relevant question that was not answered by the article, there is a fair chance that others will need this information also, and it should be added to the article.
In general, you should not expect Wikipedians to contact you by email. Instead, check back to the talk page periodically to see if your question has been answered.
We strongly recommend that if you want to participate in the Wikipedia community you create a Wikipedia account (it's free, you don't need to provide any personal or contact information, and there won't be any spam). If you log in, and if you sign your posts on talk pages with ~~~~, that will be saved on the talk page as an account signature and a timestamp. Posting to talk pages with an account is not only a local social norm, but it makes it possible for you to retain your identity across multiple editing sessions and avoid being confused with others.
Look for comprehensive review
A small number of English-language Wikipedia articles—most notably, featured articles—have had broad, systematic review. These articles usually remain at a high level of quality, but it is possible (although unlikely) that a previously reviewed article may have deteriorated since the time it received that level of attention.
Wikipedia:WikiReader discusses one of the more ambitious schemes to bring a comparable level of scrutiny to a large number of articles. As of November 2004, there have been no English-language WikiReaders published, although at least two have been issued in German, and a number of English-language WikiReaders are in progress.
Another proposed approach to formally reviewing more articles can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Fact and Reference Check; however, this project is still in its infancy, as is Wikipedia:Forum for Encyclopedic Standards.
Despite this shortage of formal review, many articles have had enormous scrutiny. Again, this can often be identified informally by browsing the history and discussion associated with the article.
Citing Wikipedia
Main page: Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia
First you should question the appropriateness of citing any encyclopedia as a source or reference. This is not simply a Wikipedia-specific issue, as most secondary schools and institutions of higher learning do not consider encyclopedias, in general, a proper citable source. Citation of Wikipedia in research papers has been known to result in a failing grade.[2][3][4]
This does not mean Wikipedia is not useful: Wikipedia articles contain many links to newspaper articles, books (often with ISBN numbers), radio programming, television shows, Web-based sources, and the like. It will usually be more acceptable to cite those original sources rather than Wikipedia since it is, by nature, a secondary or tertiary source. At the same time, simple academic ethics require that you should actually read the work that you cite: if you do not actually have your hands on a book, you should not misleadingly cite it as your source.
There are cases where contributions to Wikipedia are considered original and important enough on topics not covered in other works, so as to be considered a citeable (secondary) source. (For example, according to the New York Times' website, "The Supreme Court of Iowa cite[d] Wikipedia to explain that “jungle juice” is 'the name given to a mix of liquor that is usually served for the sole purpose of becoming intoxicated.'") [5]
Owing to the radical openness of Wikipedia, decisions about referencing articles must be made on an article-by-article basis. If one does choose to cite a Wikipedia article, references should identify a specific version of an article by providing the date and time it was created. This can be found in the edit history of the article.
If you decide to cite Wikipedia, remember that its articles are constantly changing: cite exact time, date, and version of the article version you are using. Page history and toolbox features "cite this article" and "permanent link" are very useful for finding that information. For example, the link en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Researching_with_Wikipedia&oldid=101425275 is for a specific version of this page created at 22:13 on 17 January 2007; 101425275 is the article version number. The link will display the article as it existed at that time; no later revisions will be included in the text.
Wikipedia:Wikipedia as an academic source pages contains examples of academic publications that used Wikipedia as a source.
Further help
Frequently asked questions (FAQ)
Main page: Wikipedia:FAQ
FAQ index: Index of all Wikipedia FAQ pages
Other help and feedback
There is an established escalation and dispute process within Wikipedia, as well as pages designed for raising questions, feedback, suggestions and comments, and community discussion. (See About Wikipedia).
Facilities for help for users researching specific topics can be found at:
Wikipedia:Requested articles—to suggest or request articles for future.
Wikipedia:Reference desk—to ask for help with any questions, or in finding specific facts.
Wikipedia:Help desk—Wikipedia's general help desk, if other pages haven't answered your query.
Because of the nature of Wikipedia, it's encouraged that people looking for information should try to find it themselves in the first instance. If, however, you come across valid information missing from Wikipedia, be bold and add it yourself so others can gain from your research, too!
See also
Wikipedia:A researcher's guide to discussion pages
Wikipedia:Academic resources – collection of useful resources (links to journals, etc.)
Wikipedia:Academic use – considerations for using Wikipedia as a source for academic work (including a mention that some schools object to citing encyclopedias in general and Wikipedia in particular).
Wikipedia:Content disclaimer – Wikipedia contains content you may find objectionable; it also contains spoilers
Wikipedia:Edit war – At any given time, a Wikipedia article may be involved in an "edit war".
Wikipedia:General disclaimer
Wikipedia:Legal disclaimer – Wikipedia does not give legal opinions
Wikipedia:Medical disclaimer – Wikipedia does not give medical advice
Wikipedia:No original research/Wikipedia:Verifiability – Wikipedia is not the place to publish new, original research or find research which has not yet been recognized by credible sources
Wikipedia:Patent nonsense – At any given time, a Wikipedia article may contain nonsense.
Wikipedia:Point of view – At any given time, a Wikipedia article may not have a neutral point of view.
Wikipedia:Reference desk – our help desk, feel free to ask any questions
Wikipedia:Replies to common objections
Wikipedia:Researching Wikipedia – academic research about Wikipedia, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikidemia – a related project
Wikipedia:Risk disclaimer – Use Wikipedia at your own risk.
Wikipedia:Student assignments – Wikipedia as a teaching tool
Wikipedia:Why Wikipedia is not so great, Criticism of Wikipedia and Wikipedia:Criticisms list some additional issues about Wikipedia (and what we try to do to mitigate them)
Wikipedia:Wikipedia as an academic source – list of cited uses
Wikipedia:Academic studies of Wikipedia – list of studies
References
Jump up ^ The founder of Wikipedia is the sole individual empowered to override this process, but has stated in public that extreme circumstances aside, he will not do so.
Jump up ^ Jeff Young (June 12, 2006). "Wikipedia Founder Discourages Academic Use of His Creation". The Chronicle of Higher Education.
Jump up ^ Andrew Orlowski (28 May 2006). "New Age judge blasts Apple". The Register.
Jump up ^ Andrew Orlowski (15 June 2006). "Avoid Wikipedia, warns Wikipedia chief". The Register.
Jump up ^ Noam Cohen (29 January 2007). "Courts turn to Wikipedia, but selectively". The New York Times.
External links
Brochure on how to evaluate a Wikipedia article and pdf version
How to Evaluate a Wikipedia Article – A one-page PDF with similar recommendations to this page.
Evaluating Web Pages: Techniques to Apply & Questions to Ask from the University of California, Berkeley
Critically Analyzing Information Sources from Cornell University
Roy Rosenzweig, Can History be Open Source? Wikipedia and the Future of the Past, Center for History and New Media. Originally published in The Journal of American History Volume 93, Number 1 (June, 2006): 117-46.
Rob Weir, Does Wikipedia Suck? Inside Higher Ed. March 26, 2010. A discussion of teaching critical evaluation of wikipedia and other online sources in a classroom setting.
show
v
t
e
Basic information on Wikipedia
Main Help
directory
menu
FAQs
Reference desk
Help desk
About Wikipedia
Administration
Purpose
Who writes Wikipedia?
Organization
Censorship
Introduction
Why create an account?
In brief
General disclaimer
What Wikipedia is not
Readers' FAQ
Parental advice
Navigation
Introduction
Searching
Viewing media
Help
Mobile access
Other languages
Researching with Wikipedia
Citing Wikipedia
Students help
Readers' index
Copyright
Book creation
Contributing
to Wikipedia
Main tutorial
Tutorials and introductions
The answer
Dos and don'ts
Learning the ropes
Common mistakes
Newcomer primer
Plain and simple
Your first article
Wizard
Young Wikipedians
The Adventure
Protocols
and conventions
Five pillars
Introduction
Simplified ruleset
Simplified MoS
Etiquette
Expectations
Oversight
Principles
Ignore all rules
The rules are principles
Core content policies
Policies and guidelines
Policies
Guidelines
Vandalism
Appealing blocks
Getting assistance
Requests for help
Request editor assistance
Disputes resolution requests
IRC live chat
Tutorial
Village pump
Contact us
Wikipedia community
Community portal
Dashboard
Noticeboards
Departments
Maintenance
Task Center
Essays
Meetups
WikiProjects
Sourcing
and referencing
Finding sources
Combining sources
Referencing
Introduction
Citations
Citation Style 1
Citation templates
Footnotes
Page numbers
Cite errors
Information
Editing
Toolbar
Conflict
VisualEditor
User guide
Category
Diffs
Email confirmation
Infoboxes
Linking
Link color
Manual of Style
Introduction
Simplified
Namespaces
Page name
URLs
User contribution pages
Using talk pages
Introduction
Archiving
Image and media files
Images
Media files
How-to
Guide to page deletion
Image deletion
Logging in
Merging pages
Page renaming
Requests
Redirecting
Reset passwords
Reverting
Uploading images
Introduction
Wiki markup
Wiki markup
Cheatsheet
Barcharts
Calculations
Columns
HTML
Lists
Magic words
For beginners
Music symbols
Sections
Sounds
Special Characters
Tables
Introduction
Templates
Documentation
Messages
Tools
Transclusion
Visual file markup
Tutorial
Directories
Abbreviations
Contents
Edit summaries
Essays
Glossary
Index
The Missing Manual
Shortcuts
Tips
Tip of the day
Wikis
Teahouse (interactive help for new editors)
Ask for help on your talk page (a volunteer will visit you there)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Researching_with_Wikipedia&oldid=844682698"
Categories:
Wikipedia how-to
Wikipedia resources for researchers
Hidden categories:
Wikipedia semi-protected project pages
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Project page
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
View source
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Čeština
한국어
हिन्दी
Bahasa Indonesia
Norsk
සිංහල
ไทย
Türkçe
Edit links
This page was last edited on 6 June 2018, at 12:36 (UTC).
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

key: html

type: local

value: div

attrs: id class

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

value: a

value: img

attrs: alt src width height srcset data-file-width data-file-height

attrs: href title

attrs: class id

attrs: id class lang

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

attrs: class href

values: mw-jump-link #mw-head

values: mw-jump-link #p-search

value: p

attrs: role class

values:
note
hatnote navigation-not-searchable

value: td

value: b

values:
plainlinks ombox ombox-content
presentation

values: float:right;border:1px solid #aaa;background:#fff;margin:0em 0em 0em 1em;padding:.3em .6em .2em .6em;text-align:center;font-size:85%;font-weight:bold

values:
plainlinks ombox ombox-notice
presentation

values: padding:0.2em 0 0.4em;padding-bottom:0.7em;border-bottom:1px solid #aaa;

values: padding:0 0.1em 0.4em;padding-top:0.4em;padding-bottom:0.4em;border-bottom:1px solid #aaa;

values: Help:Wikipedia: The Missing Manual/Appendixes/Reader's guide to Wikipedia

values: float:right;clear:right;width:22.0em;margin:0 0 1.0em 1.0em;background:#f9f9f9;border:1px solid #aaa;padding:0.2em;border-spacing:0.4em 0;text-align:center;line-height:1.4em;font-size:88%

values: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a reliable source

values: Wikipedia:10 things you did not know about Wikipedia

values: checkbox button toctogglecheckbox toctogglecheckbox display:none

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_Article
mw-redirect
Wikipedia:Featured Article

values:
/wiki/Lal_Masjid_siege
mw-redirect
Lal Masjid siege

values:
/wiki/Benoit_family_tragedy
mw-redirect
Benoit family tragedy

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:Find_or_fix_a_stub
mw-redirect
Wikipedia:Find or fix a stub

values: Wikipedia:Editorial oversight and control

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_committee
mw-redirect
Wikipedia:Arbitration committee

values: Wikipedia:How to read an article history

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:Page_history
mw-redirect
Wikipedia:Page history

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:Talk_pages
mw-redirect
Wikipedia:Talk pages

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:What_links_here
mw-redirect
Wikipedia:What links here

values:
/wiki/Mozilla_Firefox
mw-redirect
Mozilla Firefox

values:
/wiki/1911_Encyclop%C3%A6dia_Britannica
mw-redirect
1911 Encyclopædia Britannica

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:Who_writes_Wikipedia
mw-redirect
Wikipedia:Who writes Wikipedia

values: Wikipedia:Forum for Encyclopedic Standards

values: Wikipedia:Wikipedia as an academic source

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:Be_Bold
mw-redirect
Wikipedia:Be Bold

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:Academic_resources
mw-redirect
Wikipedia:Academic resources

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:Edit_war
mw-redirect
Wikipedia:Edit war

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:Point_of_view
mw-redirect
Wikipedia:Point of view

values:
reflist mw-references-wrap
list-style-type: decimal;

values: outreach:Evaluating Wikipedia article quality (Bookshelf)

values:
*_Main_Help
**directory
**menu
*_FAQs
*_Reference_desk
*_Help_desk

values:
row
navbox-group
text-align: center;;width:1%

values: Help:Introduction to navigating Wikipedia/1

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:Media_help
mw-redirect
Wikipedia:Media help

values: Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything

values: Help:Introduction to policies and guidelines

values: Wikipedia:Expectations and norms of the Wikipedia community

values: Wikipedia:List of policies and guidelines

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:Combining_Sources
mw-redirect
Wikipedia:Combining Sources

values: Help:Introduction to the Manual of Style

values:
/wiki/Help:Using_talk_pages
mw-redirect
Help:Using talk pages

values:
/wiki/Help:Introduction_to_talk_pages
mw-redirect
Help:Introduction to talk pages

values: Wikipedia:Creation and usage of media files

values:
/wiki/Wiki_markup
mw-redirect
Wiki markup

values:
/wiki/Help:Wiki_markup
mw-redirect
Help:Wiki markup

values:
/wiki/Help:Table/Introduction_to_tables
mw-redirect
Help:Table/Introduction to tables

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:Picture_tutorial
mw-redirect
Wikipedia:Picture tutorial

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:List_of_shortcuts
mw-redirect
Wikipedia:List of shortcuts

values: nowraplinks hlist collapsible collapsed navbox-inner mw-collapsible mw-collapsed mw-made-collapsible

values: Category:Wikipedia resources for researchers

values: Category:Wikipedia semi-protected project pages

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: You're encouraged to log in; however, it's not mandatory. [ctrl-alt-o]

values: Discussion about the content page [ctrl-alt-t]

values: p-namespaces navigation vectorTabs p-namespaces-label

values:
p-variants
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-variants-label

values:
This page is protected.
You can view its source [ctrl-alt-e]

values: Past revisions of this page [ctrl-alt-h]

values: p-views navigation vectorTabs p-views-label

values:
p-cactions
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-cactions-label

values:
mw-wiki-logo
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page

values:
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page [ctrl-alt-z]
z

values: Featured content – the best of Wikipedia

values: Find background information on current events

values:
/wiki/Special:Random
Load a random article [ctrl-alt-x]
x

values: portal navigation p-navigation p-navigation-label

values: Guidance on how to use and edit Wikipedia

values: A list of all special pages [ctrl-alt-q]

values: Permanent link to this revision of the page

values: Link to connected data repository item [ctrl-alt-g]

values: Printable version of this page [ctrl-alt-p]

values: Wikipedie:Vědecký výzkum s Wikipedií – Czech

values: 위키백과:위키백과로 연구하기 – Korean

values: विकिपीडिया:विकिपीडिया द्वारा अनुसंधान – Hindi

values: Wikipedia:Riset dengan Wikipedia – Indonesian

values: Wikipedia:Research med Wikipedia – Norwegian

values: විකිපීඩියා:විකිපීඩියාව සමග පර්යේෂණ – Sinhala

values: วิกิพีเดีย:การใช้วิกิพีเดียประกอบการวิจัย – Thai

values: Vikipedi:Vikipedi'yle araştırma yapmak – Turkish

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-4 ns-subject page-Wikipedia_Researching_with_Wikipedia rootpage-Wikipedia_Researching_with_Wikipedia skin-vector action-view


text:
The Carolinas
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about the geographic region in the southeastern U.S.. For the Pacific archipelago historically known as the Carolinas, see Caroline Islands.
Region in North CarolinaSouth CarolinaUnited States of America
The Carolinas
Region
Country
United States of America
States
North Carolina
South Carolina
Principal cities
- Charleston, South Carolina
- Charlotte, North Carolina
- Columbia, South Carolina
- Greensboro, North Carolina
- Greenville, South Carolina
- Raleigh, North Carolina
- Winston-Salem, North Carolina
Largest metropolitan area
Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia
Largest city
Charlotte
Colonized as Province
of Carolina

1663
Area
• Total
85,839 sq mi (222,320 km2)
• Land
78,804 sq mi (204,100 km2)
• Water
7,025 sq mi (18,190 km2) 8.2%
Population (2015)
• Total
14,938,948
• Density
170/sq mi (67/km2)
Demonym(s)
Carolinian
GDP (nominal)
• Total
$521.6 billion (2016)
• per capita
$42,244 (2016)
Time zone
EST (UTC-5)
• Summer (DST)
EDT (UTC-4)
The Carolinas are the U.S. states of North Carolina and South Carolina, considered collectively. It is bordered by Virginia to the north, Tennessee to the west, and Georgia to the southwest. The Atlantic Ocean is to the east. Charlotte is the Carolinas' largest city. The largest metropolitan area is the Charlotte metropolitan area, which also includes Uptown Charlotte and Rock Hill (the fifth-largest city in South Carolina). Combining North Carolina's population of 10,042,802 and South Carolina's of 4,896,146, the Carolinas have a population of 14,938,948 as of 2015. If the Carolinas were a single state of the United States, it would be the fifth-most populous state, behind California, Texas, Florida, and New York. The Carolinas were known as the Province of Carolina during America's early colonial period, from 1663 to 1710. Prior to that, the land was considered part of the Colony and Dominion of Virginia, from 1609 to 1663. The province, named Carolina to honor King Charles I of England, was divided into two colonies in 1729, although the actual date is the subject of debate.
Contents
[hide]
1 History
2 Culture
2.1 Politics
3 Economy
4 Professional sports
5 Boundary between the states
5.1 Plotting the boundary
5.2 Recent history
6 Major population centers
6.1 Combined Statistical Areas
6.2 Metropolitan Statistical Areas
6.3 Urban areas
6.4 Counties
6.5 Cities
7 See also
8 References
9 Further reading
10 External links
History[edit]
The territory (together with a part of Florida) was declared as Spanish territory by Ponce de Leon in 1512, but the first Europeans that paid the territory a visit never cared to name it. Nor was it colonized by any Spaniards; it was largely just proclaimed for a future that never came. But as French settlers arrived in 1562, they were soon thrown out by the Spaniards. However it was during this brief time that the "Carolina" first was named, and the name referred to King Charles IX of France. The territory was thereafter left to native Americans until King Charles II of England, after the English Restoration, in 1660 he gave all land between the 34th and 36th parallels to eight Englishmen. The territory was named after the English king instead, which however had no impact on the spelling. In 1729 British politicians regretted this gift and redeemed the heirs of the first eight British inhabitants. Now the Carolinas became divided into North Carolina and South Carolina, which both became British colonies. Both the new colonies were among the thirteen first states of the United States.[1]
Sir Robert Heath (1575–1649) was an English judge and politician who was also a member of the English House of Commons from 1621 to 1625. Sir Robert Heath was granted charter over the lands between latitudes 31° and 36° north, from the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean. Heath's patent required he plant a colony but that was never fully realized.
The 1663 charter granted the Lords Proprietor title to all of the land from the southern border of the Colony of Virginia at 36 degrees north to 31 degrees north (along the coast of present-day Georgia). In 1665, the charter was revised slightly, with the northerly boundary extended to 36 degrees 30 minutes north to include the lands of the Albemarle Settlements along the Albemarle Sound who had left the Colony of Virginia. Likewise, the southern boundary was moved south to 29 degrees north, just south of present-day Daytona Beach, Florida, which had the effect of including the existing Spanish settlement at St. Augustine. The charter also granted all the land, between these northerly and southerly bounds, from the Atlantic Ocean, westward to the shores of the Pacific Ocean.
The 1663 Province of Carolina Charter
The Charter of 1663 chartered the territory as an English Proprietary colony assigning rights to eight English Noblemen. These noblemen are known as the Lords Proprietors of Carolina forming the Province of Carolina.
George Monck, 1st Duke of Albemarle (1608–1670)
Edward Hyde, 1st Earl of Clarendon (1609–1674)
John Berkeley, 1st Baron Berkeley of Stratton (1607–1678)
William Craven, 1st Earl of Craven (1608–1697)
Sir George Carteret (c.1610–1680)
Sir William Berkeley (1606–1677)
Sir John Colleton, 1st Baronet (1608–1666)
Anthony Ashley Cooper, 1st Earl of Shaftesbury (1621–1683).
A New Description of Carolina", engraved by Francis Lamb (London, Tho. Basset and Richard Chiswell, 1676)
Between 1663 and 1729 there were many disagreements relating to defense, governance and the difference between the two differing agrarian styles employed by the inhabitants of the Colony of Virginia and that practiced by the planters arriving to Charles Town from the West Indies and Barbados.
In 1729 the Province of Carolina was divided when the descendants of seven of the eight Lords Proprietors sold their shares back to the Crown. Only the heirs of Sir George Carteret retained their original rights to what would become the Granville District. Both the Province of North Carolina and the Province of South Carolina became British Crown Colonies in 1729.[2]
Culture[edit]
The culture of the Carolinas is a distinct subset of larger Southern culture. Notably, the coastal Carolina region was settled by Europeans over a century before the inland regions of the South,[3] and was influenced by the culture of the Caribbean, especially Barbados; many of the early governors during the unified period were Barbadians.[4] Though the two states both form part of the South, there are historically a number of differences in the settlement patterns, political development, and economic growth of the two states. For example, during the Civil War, South Carolina was the first Southern state to secede from the Union,[5] while North Carolina was the last state to secede. When NC did secede, it did so largely because North Carolinians refused to give the Federal Government men to fight against their sister state, or allow them to pass through North Carolina to make war on South Carolina. North Carolinians ultimately voted instead in all 100 counties to raise an army, join the Confederacy, and go to war.[6] During the war, South Carolina was generally one of the strongest supporters of the Confederacy. The war began in Charleston, South Carolina; where Citadel Cadets fired the opening shots at the Union Ship Star of The West.[7] North Carolina was also a key Confederate state, raising and giving more soldiers to The Confederacy than any other southern state.[8] At Gettysburg, one in four Confederate soldiers was from North Carolina, despite the fact that some North Carolinians (especially in the western part of the state) refused to support the Confederacy.[9] North Carolina's Civil War governor, Zebulon Vance, was an outspoken critic of Confederate President Jefferson Davis and frequently refused to obey Davis's orders for reinforcements and supplies; Vance insisted the soldiers and supplies would be needed for North Carolina's Confederate effort. However, during the seven day's battles, North Carolina did send large numbers of troops for the general aid of the South as a whole.[10] During the war, the Carolinas were both instrumental in keeping The Confederacy alive, because of their deepwater ports in Wilmington, NC and Charleston, SC. These two cities were key in supplying southern armies with weapons, clothing, and ammunition; and producing food & provisions for southern civilians.[11][12]
Politics[edit]
During most of the 20th century, South Carolina was a bastion of the "solid Democratic South" with almost no Republican officeholders, and the state frequently elected politicians who were outspoken supporters of racial segregation. North Carolina, while mostly Democratic, contained a large Republican minority – the state voted Republican in the presidential election of 1928 and elected several Republican congressmen, governors, and senators from 1868–1928 – and North Carolina was widely known as one of the more progressive Southern states on the issue of segregation and civil rights. In 1947, the journalist John Gunther wrote, "that North Carolina is by a good deal the most progressive Southern state will, I imagine, be agreed to by almost everybody."[13] On the other hand, he described South Carolina as "one of the poorest American states, and probably one of the balkiest."[13] In describing the differences between the two states, Gunther noted that, in 1947, divorce in North Carolina "may be granted simply on the ground of absence of cohabitation; South Carolina is the one American state in which divorce is not possible."[13] North Carolina's nickname for many years was "a vale of humility between two mountains of conceit"; the "mountains" were Virginia and South Carolina.[13]
Despite North Carolina being a swing state, and South Carolina being a red one, they are technically the country's two most politically similar states, according to a comparison of the states along a range of 19 variables performed by the statistician Nate Silver in 2008.[14]
Economy[edit]
Traditionally, like much of the South, the Carolinas have been agricultural.[15] However, the predominance of certain crops has influenced the regional economy:[citation needed]
Like other [Southern] states, until after World War II North Carolina remained primarily a region of small farms and factories heavily dependent on just a few labor-intensive crops, relying on sharecropping and tenancy, especially for black laborers. The Carolinas are distinct for their economic dependence on tobacco as well as on cotton and rice, and for their many small-scale furniture, textile, and tobacco factories.[16]
Greenville, the largest metro area of South Carolina and a symbol of the growth in the state.
These small industries gave the Carolinas, in particular NC, a more significant industrial base than most Southern states, but as increased mechanization in the textiles, apparel, and furniture industries combined with the decline of the tobacco industry,[17] many rural and small urban communities suffered.[18] However, during the 1990s, both states began to experience growth in the technological and banking sectors, bringing jobs and population growth.[19] These changes, as with earlier industrialization, were more pronounced in North Carolina, and SC has experienced a slower rate of economic growth for several years.[20]
Professional sports[edit]
Club
League
Sport
City
Stadium
Established
Championships
Carolina Panthers
NFL Football Charlotte, North Carolina Bank of America Stadium 1995 2 Super Bowl Appearances/Conference titles, 6 Division titles (1-NFC West, 5-NFC South)
Carolina Hurricanes
NHL Hockey Raleigh, North Carolina PNC Arena 1997 1 Stanley Cup, 2 Conference Titles, 3 Division titles
Charlotte Hornets
NBA Basketball Charlotte, North Carolina Spectrum Center 1988 none
North Carolina Courage
NWSL Soccer Cary, North Carolina Sahlen's Stadium at WakeMed Soccer Park 2017 1 NWSL Shield (best regular-season record)
Charlotte Hounds
MLL Lacrosse Charlotte, North Carolina American Legion Memorial Stadium 2011 none
The Carolinas have three professional sports teams in the Big Four major leagues: the Carolina Panthers of the NFL, the Charlotte Hornets of the NBA, and the Carolina Hurricanes of the NHL. Supported by both states, the three teams are all based in NC, two in Charlotte and the third in Raleigh. All of the sports teams are fairly recent additions; the oldest team, the NFL's Panthers, was established in 1995, while the youngest, the Hornets, was added to the NBA in 2004 as the Charlotte Bobcats, although a prior NBA team also named the Hornets played in Charlotte from 1988 before leaving for New Orleans in 2002. The Bobcats were renamed the Hornets in May 2014, one season after the former New Orleans Hornets decided to rebrand themselves as the Pelicans. At that time, the Hornets also regained sole ownership of the pre-relocation history of the original Charlotte Hornets. The Hurricanes formed in 1971 as the New England Whalers of the World Hockey Association. After the NHL-WHA merger in 1979, they joined the NHL as the Hartford Whalers until 1997 when they relocated to Raleigh, North Carolina. Currently, the Hurricanes are the most successful after their 2006 Stanley Cup championship marked the first professional sports title for the region.
In 1991, Charlotte was the host city of the 1991 NBA All-Star Game, which was held at the now demolished Charlotte Coliseum. On May 24, 2017, Charlotte was awarded to be the host city of the 2019 NBA All-Star Game. The game is set to be held on February 17, 2019 at the Spectrum Center, home of the Charlotte Hornets. The game is expected to be one of the biggest sporting events to ever come to Charlotte. Bank of America Stadium currently hosts three major sporting events, the Belk Bowl, the Belk Kickoff Game and the ACC Championship Game. Charlotte Motor Speedway hosts three major NASCAR events, the Coca-Cola 600, the Monster Energy NASCAR All-Star Race, and the Bank of America 500.
The Carolinas are home to a number of NBA superstars, such as Chris Paul, James Worthy, John Wall, and Michael Jordan (from NC) and Kevin Garnett, Jermaine O'Neal, Ray Allen, and Raymond Felton (from SC). Six of these players are All Stars, four are NBA champions, and John Wall and James Worthy were the Number 1 draft picks in the 2010 NBA draft and 1982 NBA draft, respectively. A disproportional number of basketball players come from the Carolinas, on par with such big cities as New York City and Los Angeles. While the Hornets do little to generate buzz in the Carolinas, they are home to three of the most successful collegiate men's basketball teams in the NCAA, the North Carolina Tar Heels, North Carolina State Wolfpack and the Duke Blue Devils. All three schools are fierce rivals who have combined to win 13 NCAA Men's Division I Basketball Championships (UNC has 6, Duke has 5, North Carolina State has 2).
Boundary between the states[edit]
Plotting the boundary[edit]
According to the Prefatory Notes to Volume 5 of the Colonial Records of North Carolina, the process of determining the boundary between North and South Carolina began in 1720 "when the purpose to erect a third Province in Carolina, with Savannah for its northern boundary"[21] began. On 8 January 1730[22] an agreement between the two colonies said for the border "to begin 30 miles southwest of the Cape Fear river, and to be run at that parallel distance the whole course of said river;" The next June Governor Robert Johnson of South Carolina said the border should start 30 miles southwest of the source of the Cape Fear "due west as far as the South Sea", unless the "Waccamaw river lyes [sic] within 30 miles of the Cape Fear river,"[21] which would make the Waccamaw the boundary. North Carolina agreed to this until the discovery that the Cape Fear headwaters were very close to Virginia, which would not have "permitted any extension on the part of North Carolina to the westward."[21] In 1732, Governor George Burrington of North Carolina stated in Timothy's Southern Gazette that territory north of the Waccamaw was in North Carolina, to which Johnson replied that South Carolina claimed the land. Johnson also said that when the two met before the Board of Trade in London two years earlier, Burrington had "insisted that the Waccamaw should be the boundary from its mouth to its head,"[21] while South Carolina agreed the border should be located 30 miles from the mouth, not the source. Johnson said this was "only a mistake in wording it."[21]
Both Carolinas selected commissioners to survey the line between them. The plan called for the line to run northwest to 35 degrees latitude, unless the Pee Dee River was reached first, in which case it would run along the Pee Dee to 35 degrees north. Then the line would run west to Catawba town, though if the town were north of the line, the line was to run around Catawba to keep it in South Carolina.[21]
In May 1735, the surveyors went from the Cape Fear westward thirty miles along the coast. Then they turned northwest and marked the location with stakes. The surveyors agreed to meet again on September 18. However, only the North Carolina team returned at that time, extending the line northwest 70 miles. The South Carolina team arrived in October and only followed the previous line for 40 miles because they had not been paid. A deputy surveyor marked where the Pee Dee crossed the 35th parallel. An extension of the line in 1737 ran 22 miles to a stake in a meadow.[21] However, the stake placed at the endpoint of the survey was 12 miles too far south.[23]
In 1764, a second extension ran 62 miles westward. In 1772, after making adjustments to keep the Catawba Indians in South Carolina, "extended in a due west course from the confluence of the north and south forks of the Catawba River to Tryon Mountain."[21] However, this extension was based on the erroneous position of the 1737 stake, removing 422,000 acres from South Carolina.[23] Joseph Caldwell, president of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, found that the line west of the Pee Dee did not run along the 35th parallel, but 12 miles to the south. However, the western part of the line ran far enough to the north to make up for the difference.[21] West of this point the border was shifted to run north of the 35th parallel so that the total areas of the states would return to what was intended, although the accuracy of this part of the survey was marred by a magnetic anomaly in the Charlotte, North Carolina area.[23]
North Carolina did not agree to the line of 1772 until 1813.[21] A 1905 survey determined the border between Scotland County, North Carolina and Marlboro County, South Carolina. A 1928 survey decided the border between Horry County, South Carolina and Brunswick and Columbus counties in North Carolina.[24]
Recent history[edit]
In the mid-1990s, Duke Energy determined that the border between the Carolinas needed to be re-surveyed, as the company was selling and donating land in the Jocassee Gorge area, which included parts of both states.[23] Also, with more people living outside cities, the precise boundaries of fire, tax, and school district lines needed to be known. This was especially a problem in the mountains, where people had previously lived in valleys, not on the ridges where the border was. A 15-year plan to re-establish the boundary began, using maps from the 1813–1815 survey and GPS technology. A few stone markers still read, "NC/SC 1815 AD"[25] but other locations were marked with trees which no longer stand.[23]
South Carolina had recently been involved in a costly legal battle with Georgia over a small number of islands in the Savannah River, and wanted to avoid the expense of a lawsuit regarding the North Carolina border, so the two states agreed in 1993 to cooperate in resurveying the border. The effort included using colonial-era maps to reconstruct the positions of trees making the border that had long since died, and tracking down the original positions of stone markers that had been moved.[23]
After 18 years and $980,000, it was predicted that the process of determining the border between the Carolinas would be complete in 2012.[24] Financial problems delayed the last survey until October 2012, meaning the results were not expected to be known until Spring 2013.[26] It was found that a gas station and 30 homes could change states. Lake Wylie Mini Market[27][28][29][30][31][32] has been located in South Carolina, along U.S. Route 321, and the move to North Carolina would result in higher gas taxes and change laws on beer and fireworks.[33] The state legislatures involved expect to pass laws alleviating the concerns those changing states would face.[26]
The Joint Boundary Commission met in February 2014 in Monroe, North Carolina to determine what actions still needed to be taken. The persons living in 50 homes that changed states would have to get driver's licenses and register to vote in their new states. Legislative action could allow people to keep utilities, avoid back taxes to the new state, and continue in the same schools. Lake Wylie Minimarket could be grandfathered, or Congress could change the defined border at the store's location, though the commission intended to avoid such an action.[34] As of August 2014, the states were expected to pass legislation to mitigate many of the negative impacts to affected landowners.[23]
On June 1, 2016, the South Carolina House of Representatives passed a bill setting the border. North Carolina's Senate also passed a bill, which also had to clear the House. North Carolina Governor Pat McCrory signed his state's bill in June. Three families who actually lived in North Carolina had South Carolina addresses, and 16 South Carolina residents had believed they lived in North Carolina.[35][36] On December 9, 2016, McCrory announced that he signed a four-page executive order formally defining the border between the two states based on the 20 years of work.[36]
Major population centers[edit]
Combined Statistical Areas[edit]
The most populous Combined Statistical Areas of the Carolinas

Rank
CSA
Population (2017)
Population (2010)
Change
Constituent CBSA
7000100000000000000♠1 Charlotte-Concord, NC-SC Combined Statistical Area 2,684,121 2,375,675 7001129835099498040♠+12.98% Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia, NC-SC Metropolitan Statistical Area
Shelby, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area
Albemarle, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area
7000200000000000000♠2 Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill, NC Combined Statistical Area 2,199,459 1,912,729 7001149906233449690♠+14.99% Raleigh, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area
Durham-Chapel Hill, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area
Dunn, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area
Oxford, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area
Sanford, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area
Henderson, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area
7000300000000000000♠3 Greensboro–Winston-Salem–High Point, NC Combined Statistical Area 1,663,532 1,589,200 7000467732192298010♠+4.68% Greensboro-High Point, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area
Winston-Salem, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area
Burlington, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area
Mount Airy, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area
7000400000000000000♠4 Greenville-Spartanburg-Anderson, SC Combined Statistical Area 1,459,766 1,362,073 7000717237622359450♠+7.17% Greenville-Anderson-Mauldin, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area
Spartanburg, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area
Greenwood, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area
Seneca, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area
Gaffney, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area
7000500000000000000♠5 Columbia-Orangeburg-Newberry, SC Combined Statistical Area 950,997 897,607 7000594803739275650♠+5.95% Columbia, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area
Orangeburg, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area
Newberry, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area
7000600000000000000♠6 Fayetteville-Lumberton-Laurinburg, NC Combined Statistical Area 554,361 536,708 7000328912555803160♠+3.29% Fayetteville, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area
Lumberton, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area
Laurinburg, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area
7000700000000000000♠7 Myrtle Beach-Conway, SC-NC Combined Statistical Area 525,772 436,880 7001203470060428490♠+20.35% Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach, SC-NC Metropolitan Statistical Area
Georgetown, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area
7000800000000000000♠8 Hickory-Lenoir, NC Combined Statistical Area 411,693 410,493 6999292331416126460♠+0.29% Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area
Marion, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area
7000900000000000000♠9 Greenville-Washington, NC Combined Statistical Area 226,130 215,907 7000473490901175040♠+4.73% Greenville, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area
Washington, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area
7001100000000000000♠10 New Bern-Morehead City, NC Combined Statistical Area 193,745 193,271 6999245251486255050♠+0.25% New Bern, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area
Morehead City, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area
Metropolitan Statistical Areas[edit]
The most populous Metropolitan Statistical Areas of the Carolinas

Rank
MSA
Population (2017)
Population (2010)
Change
Encompassing CSA
7000100000000000000♠1 Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia, NC-SC Metropolitan Statistical Area 2,525,305 2,217,012 7001139057885117450♠+13.91% Charlotte-Concord, NC-SC Combined Statistical Area
7000200000000000000♠2 Raleigh, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area 1,335,079 1,130,490 7001180973737052070♠+18.10% Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill, NC Combined Statistical Area
7000300000000000000♠3 Greenville-Anderson-Mauldin, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area 895,923 824,112 7000871374279224179♠+8.71% Greenville-Spartanburg-Anderson, SC Combined Statistical Area
7000400000000000000♠4 Columbia, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area 825,033 767,598 7000748243221061020♠+7.48% Columbia-Orangeburg-Newberry, SC Combined Statistical Area
7000500000000000000♠5 Charleston-North Charleston, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area 775,831 664,607 7001167353037208460♠+16.74%
7000600000000000000♠6 Greensboro-High Point, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area 761,184 723,801 7000516481740146810♠+5.16% Greensboro–Winston-Salem–High Point, NC Combined Statistical Area
7000700000000000000♠7 Winston-Salem, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area 667,733 640,595 7000423637399605050♠+4.24% Greensboro–Winston-Salem–High Point, NC Combined Statistical Area
Urban areas[edit]
The most populous Urban Areas of the Carolinas

Rank
Urban Area
Population (2010)
Population (2000)
Change
Land Area
(sq mi)
7000100000000000000♠1 Charlotte, NC-SC 1,249,442 758,927 7001646326985335880♠+64.63% 741.5
7000200000000000000♠2 Raleigh, NC 884,891 541,527 7001634066260777390♠+63.41% 518.1
7000300000000000000♠3 Columbia, SC 549,777 420,537 7001307321353412420♠+30.73% 380.0
7000400000000000000♠4 Charleston-North Charleston, SC 548,404 423,410 7001295207954464940♠+29.52% 293.4
7000500000000000000♠5 Greenville, SC 400,492 302,194 7001325281110809610♠+32.53% 320.3
7000600000000000000♠6 Winston-Salem, NC 391,024 299,290 7001306505396104110♠+30.65% 322.6
7000700000000000000♠7 Durham, NC 347,602 287,796 7001207806918789700♠+20.78% 181.7
7000800000000000000♠8 Greensboro, NC 311,810 267,884 7001163973958877720♠+16.40% 185.2
Counties[edit]
The most populous Counties of the Carolinas

Rank
County
Population (2017)[37]
Population (2010)
Change
Area
(sq mi)
Primary City
7000100000000000000♠1 Mecklenburg County, North Carolina 1,076,837 919,628 7001170948470468490♠+17.09% 546 Charlotte
7000200000000000000♠2 Wake County, North Carolina 1,072,203 900,993 7001190023673879820♠+19.00% 857 Raleigh
7000300000000000000♠3 Guilford County, North Carolina 526,953 488,406 7000789240918416240♠+7.89% 658 Greensboro
7000400000000000000♠4 Greenville County, South Carolina 506,837 451,225 7001123246717269650♠+12.32% 795 Greenville
7000500000000000000♠5 Richland County, South Carolina 411,592 384,504 7000704492020889250♠+7.04% 772 Columbia
7000600000000000000♠6 Charleston County, South Carolina 401,438 350,209 7001146281220642530♠+14.63% 1,358 Charleston
Cities[edit]
The major Cities of the Carolinas

Rank
City
Population (2016)
Population (2010)
Change
Area
(sq mi)
7000100000000000000♠1 Charlotte, North Carolina 842,051 731,424 7001151248796867480♠+15.12% 297.7
7000200000000000000♠2 Raleigh, North Carolina 458,880 403,892 7001136145306170960♠+13.61% 144.8
7000300000000000000♠3 Greensboro, North Carolina 287,027 269,666 7000643796399991100♠+6.44% 131.2
7000400000000000000♠4 Charleston, South Carolina 134,385 120,083 7001119100955172670♠+11.91% 127.5
7000500000000000000♠5 Columbia, South Carolina 134,309 129,272 7000389643542298410♠+3.90% 134.9
7000600000000000000♠6 Greenville, South Carolina 67,453 58,409 7001154839151500620♠+15.48% 28.8
See also[edit]
Cuisine of the Southern United States
Politics of the Southern United States
Southern American English
The Californias
The Canadas
The Dakotas
The Floridas
The Virginias
References[edit]
Jump up ^ Swedish Encyclopedia "Nordisk Familjebok", third edition, printed in 1942, volume 4 of 23, article "Carolina". It covers the entire part above
Jump up ^ The Split – One Colony Becomes Two from carolana.com
Jump up ^ Carolina Folk: The Cradle of a Southern Tradition. McKissick Museum. Columbia, South Carolina: University of South Carolina Press. 2006. p. 33. ISBN 0-87249-950-2. Retrieved 7 June 2008.
Jump up ^ "SCIway News No. 43". May 2007. Retrieved 7 June 2008.
Jump up ^ "A Brief History of South Carolina". South Carolina Department of Archives and History. Archived from the original on 23 April 2008. Retrieved 7 June 2008.
Jump up ^ Robert Morgan (22 August 2003). "The Bill of Rights Belongs in North Carolina". New York Times. Retrieved 7 June 2008.
Jump up ^ "Star of the West fired upon in Charleston Harbor". wordpress.com. 9 January 2008. Retrieved 10 April 2017.
Jump up ^ "Monuments to the 26th North Carolina at Gettysburg". stonesentinels.com. Retrieved 10 April 2017.
Jump up ^ "State of North Carolina monument at Gettysburg". stonesentinels.com. Retrieved 10 April 2017.
Jump up ^ "Book Review: War Governor of the South". The Journal of American History. September 2006. Archived from the original on 30 August 2008. Retrieved 7 June 2008.
Jump up ^ "City of Wilmington, NC : Home". wilmingtonnc.gov. Retrieved 10 April 2017.
Jump up ^ "Charleston, SC - Official Website - History of City". charleston-sc.gov. Retrieved 10 April 2017.
^ Jump up to: a b c d Gunther, John (1947). Inside U.S.A. (50th Anniversary ed.). New Press. pp. 719–723. ISBN 978-1-56584-358-5.
Jump up ^ Nate Silver (7 July 2008). "State Similarity Scores". FiveThirtyEight.com. Retrieved 7 July 2008.
Jump up ^ See Wallace Stevens's poem "In the Carolinas" for a reference to the fertility of this part of the world.
Jump up ^ Williams, B. (1988). Upscaling Downtown: Stalled Gentrification in Washington. Anthropology of contemporary issues. Cornell University Press. p. 13. ISBN 978-0-8014-9419-2. Retrieved 2015-09-11.
Jump up ^ "Tobacco-Dependent Communities Research Initiative". N.C. Rural Economic Development Center. 2000–2005. Archived from the original on 1 June 2008. Retrieved 7 June 2008.
Jump up ^ "Rural Dislocated Worker Initiative". N.C. Rural Economic Development Center. 2000–2007. Archived from the original on 14 August 2007. Retrieved 7 June 2008.
Jump up ^ "North Carolina". American Planning Association. Archived from the original on 11 May 2008. Retrieved 7 June 2008.
Jump up ^ Jim DuPlessis (6 June 2008). "U.S. economic growth matches S.C. at 2 percent in 2007". TheState.com. Retrieved 7 June 2008. [dead link]
^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j "History of Western North Carolina – Chapter II. Boundaries". webroots. Archived from the original on 3 December 2008. Retrieved 5 April 2011.
Jump up ^ "Carolina Noteworthy Events – The North Carolina-South Carolina Border Surveys – 1730 to 1815". carolana.com. Retrieved 5 April 2011.
^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g Kelly, Stephen R. (23 August 2014). "How the Carolinas Fixed Their Blurred Lines". The New York Times. Retrieved 23 August 2014.
^ Jump up to: a b Beam, Adam (12 February 2012). "N.C.-S.C. border may move". The State. Archived from the original on 12 February 2012. Retrieved 29 February 2012.
Jump up ^ Dan Huntley, "Surveyors to Separate Carolinas, Precisely", The Charlotte Observer, 27 December 2001.
^ Jump up to: a b Beam, Adam (2 December 2012). "New SC-NC line delayed until spring". The State.
Jump up ^ Ajit Pai. "Ajit Pai on Twitter". twitter.com. Retrieved 10 April 2017.
Jump up ^ "How the Carolinas Fixed Their Blurred Lines". The New York Times. 24 August 2014. Retrieved 10 April 2017.
Jump up ^ "Lake Wylie Mini Market - Clover, SC". yelp.com. Retrieved 10 April 2017.
Jump up ^ "NC, SC state line isn't where folks thought it was". nbcnews.com. 23 March 2012. Retrieved 10 April 2017.
Jump up ^ "What NC lawmakers did – and didn't do – in the short session". charlotteobserver.com. Retrieved 10 April 2017.
Jump up ^ "Border change between North, South Carolina gets closer". miamiherald.com. Retrieved 10 April 2017.
Jump up ^ Severson, Kim (5 April 2012). "Untangling a Border Could Leave a Mess for Some". The New York Times. Retrieved 19 April 2012.
Jump up ^ Collins, Jeffrey (7 February 2014). "Officials discuss legislation over North, South Carolina border". Augusta Chronicle. Associated Press. Retrieved 11 March 2014.
Jump up ^ "SC House passes bill clarifying border between Carolinas". The Charlotte Observer. Associated Press. 1 June 2016. Retrieved 2 June 2016. [permanent dead link]
^ Jump up to: a b Stradling, Richard (9 December 2016). "The border between North and South Carolina is officially settled". The Charlotte Observer. Archived from the original on 10 April 2017. Retrieved 5 January 2017.
Jump up ^ "QuickFacts". Census Bureau. Census Bureau. Retrieved May 22, 2017.
Further reading[edit]
John Gunther. Inside USA, Harper & Brothers, 1947.
External links[edit]
Media related to The Carolinas at Wikimedia Commons
[hide]
v
t
e
State of North Carolina
Raleigh (capital)
Topics
Climate
Geography
State Parks
Wildlife
History
Media
Newspapers
Radio
TV
North Carolinians
Politics
Government
Law
Tourist attractions
Seal of North Carolina
Society
Culture
Music
Sports
Crime
Demographics
Economy
Education
Elections
Gambling
Regions
Western
Foothills
High Country
Piedmont
Metrolina (Charlotte)
Piedmont Triad
Triangle
Eastern
Sandhills
Cape Fear
Crystal Coast
Inner Banks
Outer Banks
Largest cities
Asheville
Cary
Chapel Hill
Charlotte
Concord
Durham
Fayetteville
Gastonia
Greensboro
Greenville
High Point
Jacksonville
Raleigh
Wilmington
Winston‑Salem
Smaller cities
Albemarle
Apex
Asheboro
Burlington
Conover
Eden
Elizabeth City
Garner
Goldsboro
Graham
Havelock
Henderson
Hendersonville
Hickory
Kannapolis
Kings Mountain
Kinston
Laurinburg
Lenoir
Lexington
Lumberton
Monroe
Morganton
New Bern
Newton
Reidsville
Roanoke Rapids
Rocky Mount
Salisbury
Sanford
Shelby
Statesville
Thomasville
Wake Forest
Wilson
Major towns
Beaufort
Boone
Brevard
Carrboro
Clayton
Cornelius
Dunn
Fuquay-Varina
Harrisburg
Holly Springs
Hope Mills
Huntersville
Indian Trail
Kernersville
Knightdale
Leland
Matthews
Midland
Mint Hill
Mooresville
Morehead City
Morrisville
Mount Pleasant
Oxford
Shallotte
Smithfield
Southern Pines
Tarboro
Waynesville
Winterville
Counties
Alamance
Alexander
Alleghany
Anson
Ashe
Avery
Beaufort
Bertie
Bladen
Brunswick
Buncombe
Burke
Cabarrus
Caldwell
Camden
Carteret
Caswell
Catawba
Chatham
Cherokee
Chowan
Clay
Cleveland
Columbus
Craven
Cumberland
Currituck
Dare
Davidson
Davie
Duplin
Durham
Edgecombe
Forsyth
Franklin
Gaston
Gates
Graham
Granville
Greene
Guilford
Halifax
Harnett
Haywood
Henderson
Hertford
Hoke
Hyde
Iredell
Jackson
Johnston
Jones
Lee
Lenoir
Lincoln
Macon
Madison
Martin
McDowell
Mecklenburg
Mitchell
Montgomery
Moore
Nash
New Hanover
Northampton
Onslow
Orange
Pamlico
Pasquotank
Pender
Perquimans
Person
Pitt
Polk
Randolph
Richmond
Robeson
Rockingham
Rowan
Rutherford
Sampson
Scotland
Stanly
Stokes
Surry
Swain
Transylvania
Tyrrell
Union
Vance
Wake
Warren
Washington
Watauga
Wayne
Wilkes
Wilson
Yadkin
Yancey
[hide]
v
t
e
State of South Carolina
Columbia (capital)
Regions
Atlantic Coastal Plain
Blue Ridge Mountains
Grand Strand
High Hills of Santee
Lake Murray Country
Lowcountry
Metrolina
Midlands
Ninety-Six District
Olde English District
Pee Dee
Piedmont
Sandhills
Sea Islands
Upstate
Seal of South Carolina
Larger cities
Charleston
Columbia
Greenville
North Charleston
Rock Hill
Spartanburg
Smaller cities
Aiken
Anderson
Beaufort
Bennettsville
Camden
Cayce
Conway
Easley
Florence
Forest Acres
Gaffney
Georgetown
Greenwood
Greer
Goose Creek
Hilton Head Island
Isle of Palms
Laurens
Lexington
Mauldin
Myrtle Beach
North Augusta
North Myrtle Beach
Orangeburg
Simpsonville
Summerville
Sumter
Union
Walterboro
West Columbia
York
Towns
Abbeville
Barnwell
Batesburg-Leesville
Bluffton
Clemson
Darlington
Dillon
Edgefield
Fort Mill
Fountain Inn
Great Falls
Hardeeville
Irmo
Jefferson
Kingstree
Liberty
Marion
McCormick
Moncks Corner
Mount Pleasant
Newberry
Pageland
Pendleton
Pickens
Seneca
Sullivan's Island
Travelers Rest
Walhalla
Westminster
Williamston
CDPs
Berea
Carolina Forest
Dentsville
Gantt
Garden City
Ladson
Parker
Red Hill
Saint Andrews
Seven Oaks
Socastee
Taylors
Wade Hampton
Counties
Abbeville
Aiken
Allendale
Anderson
Bamberg
Barnwell
Beaufort
Berkeley
Calhoun
Charleston
Cherokee
Chester
Chesterfield
Clarendon
Colleton
Darlington
Dillon
Dorchester
Edgefield
Fairfield
Florence
Georgetown
Greenville
Greenwood
Hampton
Horry
Jasper
Kershaw
Lancaster
Laurens
Lee
Lexington
Marion
Marlboro
McCormick
Newberry
Oconee
Orangeburg
Pickens
Richland
Saluda
Spartanburg
Sumter
Union
Williamsburg
York
Topics
Airports
Amusement parks
Census areas
Colleges and universities
Congressional districts
Famous people
Governors
Highways
Historic places
History
Legislature
Media
Newspapers
Radio
TV
Rivers
Shopping malls
Sports venues
State House
State parks
Tourist attractions
Wildlife refuges
Society
Crime
Culture
Demographics
Economy
Education
Politics
Sports
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Carolinas&oldid=839627347"
Categories:
Divided regions
Border irregularities of the United States
History of the Thirteen Colonies
Geography of North Carolina
Geography of South Carolina
Regions of the Southern United States
1663 establishments in the Thirteen Colonies
Hidden categories:
All articles with dead external links
Articles with dead external links from September 2010
Articles with dead external links from September 2017
Articles with permanently dead external links
Articles with short description
All articles with unsourced statements
Articles with unsourced statements from June 2008
Use dmy dates from October 2010
North Carolina articles missing geocoordinate data
All articles needing coordinates
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
In other projects
Wikimedia Commons
Languages
Català
Dansk
Español
Føroyskt
Français
Frysk
Latina
Lietuvių
မြန်မာဘာသာ
Norsk
Português
Simple English
5 more
Edit links
This page was last edited on 4 May 2018, at 16:59.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: jump-to-nav mw-jump

values:
note
hatnote navigation-not-searchable

attrs: class style

values: shortdescription nomobile noexcerpt noprint searchaux

value: span

value: th

attrs: colspan style

value: tr

attrs: href class

attrs: alt src width height class srcset data-file-width data-file-height

values:
/wiki/Eastern_Daylight_Time
mw-redirect
Eastern Daylight Time

values:
/wiki/Uptown_Charlotte
mw-redirect
Uptown Charlotte

values: List of U.S. states and territories by population

values:
/wiki/Colonial_America
mw-redirect
Colonial America

values:
/wiki/Colony_and_Dominion_of_Virginia
mw-redirect
Colony and Dominion of Virginia

values:
/wiki/Lords_Proprietors_of_Carolina
mw-redirect
Lords Proprietors of Carolina

values: John Berkeley, 1st Baron Berkeley of Stratton

values: William Craven, 1st Earl of Craven (1608–1697)

values: Anthony Ashley Cooper, 1st Earl of Shaftesbury

values:
/wiki/Zebulon_Vance
mw-redirect
Zebulon Vance

values: This claim needs references to reliable sources. (June 2008)

values:
noprint Inline-Template Template-Fact
white-space:nowrap;

values: font-weight: normal; text-align: center;

values: Major professional sports leagues in the United States and Canada

values:
/wiki/NHL-WHA_merger
mw-redirect
NHL-WHA merger

values: North Carolina Tar Heels men's basketball

values: Edit section: Boundary between the states

values: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

values:
/wiki/Alcohol_laws_of_the_United_States
mw-redirect
Alcohol laws of the United States

values: Edit section: Combined Statistical Areas

values:
headerSort
0
columnheader button
Sort ascending

values:
/wiki/Core_Based_Statistical_Area
mw-redirect
Core Based Statistical Area

values: Shelby, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area

values: Albemarle, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area

values: Raleigh, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area

values: Oxford, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area

values: Sanford, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area

values: Henderson, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area

values: Winston-Salem, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area

values: Burlington, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area

values: Mount Airy, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area

values: Spartanburg, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area

values: Greenwood, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area

values: Seneca, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area

values: Gaffney, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area

values: Columbia, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area

values: Orangeburg, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area

values: Newberry, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area

values: Fayetteville, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area

values: Lumberton, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area

values: Laurinburg, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area

values: Georgetown, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area

values: Hickory-Lenoir, NC Combined Statistical Area

values: Marion, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area

values: Greenville, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area

values: Washington, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area

values: New Bern, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area

values: Morehead City, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area

values: Edit section: Metropolitan Statistical Areas

values:
/wiki/Combined_Statistical_Area
mw-redirect
Combined Statistical Area

values:
nofollow
external text
http://www.sciway.net/sn/43.html#6

values:
/wiki/New_York_Times
mw-redirect
New York Times

values:
nofollow
external text
http://www.wilmingtonnc.gov

values:
/wiki/Augusta_Chronicle
mw-redirect
Augusta Chronicle

values: -moz-column-width: 30em; -webkit-column-width: 30em; column-width: 30em; list-style-type: decimal;

values: List of radio stations in North Carolina

values: List of television stations in North Carolina

values: Category:Tourist attractions in North Carolina

values:
navbox-image
7
width:1px;padding:0px 0px 0px 2px

values: List of municipalities in North Carolina

values: nowraplinks collapsible expanded navbox-inner

values:
navbox-image
8
width:1px;padding:0px 0px 0px 2px

values: List of cities and towns in South Carolina

values: Category:Census-designated places in South Carolina

values: Index of South Carolina-related articles

values: Category:Amusement parks in South Carolina

values: List of colleges and universities in South Carolina

values: South Carolina's congressional districts

values: List of numbered highways in South Carolina

values: National Register of Historic Places listings in South Carolina

values: List of radio stations in South Carolina

values: List of television stations in South Carolina

values: Category:Shopping malls in South Carolina

values: Category:Sports venues in South Carolina

values: Category:Tourist attractions in South Carolina

values: Category:National Wildlife Refuges in South Carolina

values: Category:Border irregularities of the United States

values: Category:History of the Thirteen Colonies

values: Category:Regions of the Southern United States

values: Category:1663 establishments in the Thirteen Colonies

values: Category:All articles with dead external links

values: Category:Articles with dead external links from September 2010

values: Category:Articles with dead external links from September 2017

values: Category:Articles with permanently dead external links

values: Category:Articles with short description

values: Category:All articles with unsourced statements

values: Category:Articles with unsourced statements from June 2008

values: Category:Use dmy dates from October 2010

values: Category:North Carolina articles missing geocoordinate data

values: Category:All articles needing coordinates

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: You're encouraged to log in; however, it's not mandatory. [ctrl-alt-o]

values:
/wiki/The_Carolinas
View the content page [ctrl-alt-c]
c

values: Discussion about the content page [ctrl-alt-t]

values: p-namespaces navigation vectorTabs p-namespaces-label

values:
p-variants
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-variants-label

values: Past revisions of this page [ctrl-alt-h]

values: p-views navigation vectorTabs p-views-label

values:
p-cactions
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-cactions-label

values:
mw-wiki-logo
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page

values:
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page [ctrl-alt-z]
z

values: Featured content – the best of Wikipedia

values: About the project, what you can do, where to find things

values: A list of recent changes in the wiki [ctrl-alt-r]

values: portal navigation p-interaction p-interaction-label

values: List of all English Wikipedia pages containing links to this page [ctrl-alt-j]

values: Recent changes in pages linked from this page [ctrl-alt-k]

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:File_Upload_Wizard
Upload files [ctrl-alt-u]
u

values: portal navigation p-wikibase-otherprojects p-wikibase-otherprojects-label

values:
https://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolina
Carolina – Danish
da
da
interlanguage-link-target

values:
https://fo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolina
Carolina – Faroese
fo
fo
interlanguage-link-target

values:
https://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolinae
Carolinae – Latin
la
la
interlanguage-link-target

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-la
display: none;

values:
https://lt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karolinos
Karolinos – Lithuanian
lt
lt
interlanguage-link-target

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-lt
display: none;

values: ကယ်ရိုလိုင်းနားပြည်နယ် – Burmese

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-my
display: none;

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-no
display: none;

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-simple
display: none;

values: All languages (initial selection from common choices by you and others)

values: /static/images/wikimedia-button-1.5x.png 1.5x, /static/images/wikimedia-button-2x.png 2x

values: /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_132x47.png 1.5x, /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_176x62.png 2x

values:
suggestions
display: none; font-size: 13px;

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-The_Carolinas rootpage-The_Carolinas skin-vector action-view