Most style guides say to place a comma after the state (in a city-state adjective combo) and year (in a full-date adjective). This seems like poor logic. Consider: <the July 15, 2014, edition> <the Gary, Indiana, resident> It seems as though the comma after "2014" and "Indiana" should be removed, logically speaking. After all, we wouldn't write "the Indiana, resident," nor would we write "the 2014, edition." "Indiana" and "2014" are essential information, or we wouldn't know what particular state or year was being referred to. Do you agree with my revisions below? <the July 15, 2014 edition> <the Gary, Indiana resident> Thank you, as always, for taking the time to read this.
I'm having a hard time finding the logic in it, so I'm inclined to agree with you. With that said, I may just be unable to see the right perspective, so I could be wrong. Moral of the story? I'm no help.
Maybe it's because one might see it and assume you're speaking to someone named Gary. But perhaps, adding "the" at the beginning negates this rule.
Every authoritative guide I've come across says to keep the comma. If this bothers you, you always have the option of rephrasing the sentence (e.g., "The resident from Gary, Indiana, did something.").
In both instances the comma'd off portion is a sub-clause which isn't essential to the sentence making sense and complying with grammatical rules; it simply adds further information. The Gary, industrial lake city located within the inland state of Indiana, resident stated that he was fed up with this newspaper's perpetual circumlocutory tendencies. The July, in the year of our Lord 2014, edition of the newspaper was notable for the excessive verbosity of its reporting.
I've never seen this to be honest with you. I'll take a look at one of my textbooks. Well I didn't find date on there but I did find [Address],[City],[State],[Zip Code] I've never put a comma after the year though, because without it it would be the July 15 edition, so it doesn't make any sense.
