Talk:South Central United States

Unneeded article?

Why is this here? There are no sources, the region is not listed on List_of_regions_of_the_United_States, which is fairly comprehensive. It just seems like someone picked a directional region and made up an article about it. There are no articles on East or North Central United States, which are no more arbitrary than this. From the discussion below, users are trying to 'decide' on the page what states are included, rather than citing any original research elsewhere; all the more proof this page is not about a real thing. 198.46.75.6 (talk) 18:18, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Exactly! As soon as I saw this article even *existed* I thought the same thing and literally wanted to start ringing a bell over and over again. I second the motion to eliminate this article. (BenjPHolm) 21:09, 10 June 2016 (EDT) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.36.91.9 (talk)

Untitled

For optional guidelines on contributing see WikiProject U.S. regions

According to new policy adopted by Wikiproject U.S. regions this article should be at South Central United States. I will be moving it there momentarily. -JCarriker 12:27, May 23, 2005 (UTC)

Colours and appearance

I have made a proposal to change the colour of the map box, please see the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. regions --Qirex 05:37, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Midsouth

In my experience (and Google seems to agree), "Midsouth" is another common name for this region. Would anyone object to me adding the name in the intro as an alternate? — BrianSmithson 19:02, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't think anyone would object. Please feel free to add the name and a redirect at your convenience. -JCarriker 19:08, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Done. There's apparantly a Tennessee region called "Midsouth" as well, but that's disambiguated at Mid-South. The other redirects (Midsouth, MidSouth, Mid-south) should perhaps redirect there instead of here, though I'm not sure. — BrianSmithson 19:33, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Map Revision?

Just wanted to toss something out to see what others think. I am proposing a revision of the map which would eliminate New Mexico entirely, and "stripe" in -- along with Mississippi -- Tennessee, Alabama, and Kentucky.

The rationale is that all of these states make up, respectively, the West South Central and East South Central United states according to Census Bureau definitions. The combinations are a much better commonly understood definition, and too, all of the aforementioned states can be fairly called, to one degree or another, a part of the Southern United States. Whereas New Mexico cannot.

Also, the article portion could use some work as well. Kansas for example, could, perhaps, under some business divisions of the country, be considered "South Central" but that is about all. In terms of history and culture -- which the opening of the article opins with as broad definition -- it isn't. And even worse, Utah? C'mon! LOL I hasten to add that I am not being sarcastic, but I would bet the farm that people in those states would laugh at the notion, just as those in the South Central states would chuckle in reverse, in turn! :-)

What say the rest of y'all? TexasReb (talk) 00:35, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

I think your revision makes perfect sense. I'm not sure that I would throw Kentucky in there, but if you think it constitutes go on ahead. I agree with Kansas by the way. I went to school there, but am from Dallas, and I think it constitutes South Central pretty easily. It wildly different from Nebraska, etc.. Besides, it's apart of Southwestern Bell, Southwest Power Pool, Southwest Power Lines, South Central Agriculture Department, and South Central Cotton Department ( I majored in engineering in case you wondering why I know this). Just my opinion.. Jayhawk23 (talk) 22:59, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your input! However, there may be some confusion between us concerning Kansas (which is likely my fault for not clarifying very well). Anyway, while you are definitely correct that there are entities named "Southwest" or "South Central" which cover Kansas, the state is culturally and geographically part of the Midwest. Anyway, the reason I suggested that Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee and Kentucky be striped while Texas, Arkansas, Louisiana and Oklahoma are in red is that, by Census Bureau definition and other government definition, the former constitute the "East South Central" region while the latter are considered "West South Central." And although the western parts (TX,OK,AK,LA) are ALWAYS considered South Central (as the map shows), sometimes the eastern section is as well. Too, they can all be -- to one degree or another -- considered part of the Southern United States. Of course, a mention in the article that Kansas (and one or two other states, perhaps)are covered by a few entities in some concerns under the term, would be very appropriate, I think. Does all that make sense?  :-) TexasReb (talk) 14:50, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I would probably maintain New Mexico as is. "South Central" isn't a very common term, but if we're going off the article's definition of a region centered around Texas and rooted in "the West" of the old South, New Mexico would in fact be the furthest extent of this. Portions of it were held by the Confederacy and settled by Confederates. Today, while it's about a 60-40 split with Denver, Dallas sports teams predominate in support from New Mexicans. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:1105:C15F:E450:B575:50B5:8642 (talk) 10:10, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Major cities

Is there a reason the list includes Little Rock but does not include Arlington, Corpus Christie, Plano, Laredo, and Lubbock? —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 21:41, 17 July 2021 (UTC)