Talk:Texas

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 10:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

GA reassessment

Texas

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: I'm going close this discussion as delist. The issues that I pointed out still exist, and would most certainly result in an automatic fail if an article like this were nominated for GA. Aside from the obvious, I would recommend condensing the lead to four paragraphs, and condensing the history section (especially the Pre-European era and Colonization subsections) the Demographics section, and the politics sections, as well as minor condenses throughout the entire article where necessary. This does not, however, mean that a large amount of information needs to be cut. Bneu2013 (talk) 04:21, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

The biggest issue is the article's length. It is currently 15,630 words, and the recommended length is no more than 10,000 words. In addition, there is some content that is missing citations, and information that needs to be updated. Bneu2013 (talk) 04:03, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

The length here is not inherently a problem; huge sweeping topics often permit larger articles. Having said that, this article passed GAN in 2008 at less than half its current length, meaning most of the text is unassessed. This is a good example of the need for GA sweeps -- there are more than a few articles in this position. It might require delisting, but could also just require a simple tune-up to see what of the added text is useful and polish it up. I've no sufficient grasp of the subject matter to lead such a job. Vami IV? Vaticidalprophet 02:14, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

I don't feel qualified to lead a reassessment either; however if this no longer meets GA, I don't think its far from it. I do agree that extensive topics such as this can exceed 10,000 words and still pass GA; some other users would disagree with me on this. Bneu2013 (talk) 02:23, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

I am no expert, but I do happen to live in Texas. I'll have a look at this later in the week, ping me if need be. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 07:53, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Forgive me for adding a huge amount of information. It's entirely my fault. - TheLionHasSeen (talk) 13:58, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

I'll look over this article soon. Stedil (talk) 01:34, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Taxation line lacking valid citation

The first line of the third paragraph of the Taxation section reads:"Texas is a "tax donor state"; in 2005, for every dollar Texans paid to the federal government in federal income taxes, the state got back about $0.94 in benefits." This line is both perplexing and its citation does not provide this information. Reference 260 redirects to a page which links to many posts but contains no information on the page itself. I propose this line should be removed if another reference cannot be found and–if another reference is found–the sentence should be clarified. Venusasaguy (talk) 14:51, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

Demographic Section Sentence Update Based On Newly Released Census Data

Please change the last sentence of paragraph one of the demographic section from

Texas is the second-most populous state in the United States after California.

to

Texas is the second-most populous state in the United States after California and the only other U.S. state to surpass a total estimated population of 30 million people as of July 2, 2022. Deepthinker73 (talk) 06:42, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Please also change the demographic chart on the right side of the page showing "est." 2021 population to the newly released 2022 estimated population of 30,029,572.

 Done RealAspects (talk) 07:08, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you RealAspects, but I added one more thing to the request, that I guess didn't make it before the approval. Please see the last bit "Please also change the demographic chart on the right side of the page showing "est." 2021 population to the newly released 2022 estimated population of 30,029,572 which is a 3.03% increase over 2020." or do I need to submit a new Edit Request for that section/chart on the page? Deepthinker73 (talk) 07:20, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

I was actually able to make the change, but thanks! Deepthinker73 (talk) 10:08, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 15 March 2023

texas needs to be 2 times as big Evan1328 (talk) 16:43, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. —Sirdog (talk) 16:45, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Everything is bigger in Texas but like Sirdog said, you gotta have proof Cleter (talk) 04:50, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Texas Tech University Teir 1 Research

Texas Tech University is now a 'Teir 1' research university (as of 2021). It is currently listed as a 'Teir 2' university.

https://today.ttu.edu/posts/2021/12/Stories/Carnegie-Classification-Reaffirms-Texas-Tech-as-Tier-One-Research-University 2603:8080:2900:BD95:0:0:0:18C9 (talk) 04:40, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Shouldn't abortion laws be mentioned?

Is mentioning abortion in state's articles actually WP: Undue? Heck, the Texas Heartbeat Act was partially responsible for Dobbs. That seems to warrant mention to me. There's a lot of other things mentioned in the article with much less apparent importance.

It seems indisputable to me that circumstance has changed the subject's notoriety dramatically before and after. KlayCax (talk) 23:20, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Abortion is already extensively covered in the healthcare section. Add material there if you think it's needed, but reference in the lead will require a broader consensus. ~ Pbritti (talk) 23:47, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Addition of length template

This edit by User:Nikkimaria adds a length template to this article. I don't understand the justification for the edit, which Nikkimaria does not elaborate in edit history. In order to improve the article, I'm asking for some guidance about what specifically needs to be improved. A number of editors have put effort into reducing unnecessary or lengthy information. However, reading the article now, many statements are not excessively long. Therefore, I'm at a loss as to why the length template would apply here, or what would need to be changed to justify removing it. Clarification would be appreciated, and absent any clarification I will WP:BEBOLD and remove it. Cleter (talk) 04:37, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

The fix would be to move some of the details to the appropriate subarticles - see WP:DETAIL. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:39, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Which details and subarticles are we talking about here? Many editors have taken action to improve Texas's length, with your length template being present for approximately 7 months. If there are any specific sections that need shortening, please include that. Thank you. Cleter (talk) 04:46, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

The sections in needs of shortening are all the ones between the lead and Government and politics, inclusive, plus External links. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:55, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I look forward to this matter and see to it that it is resolved. I would appreciate it if other editors would focus their attention on this as well, so that the template may be removed and all may be well. Cleter (talk) 04:59, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

I didn't read that thoroughly, you want the entire article to be shortened except for criminal law? You are being broad, please be specific. Cleter (talk) 05:02, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

No, including criminal law. Nikkimaria (talk) 05:03, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Ok fine, but how should the template be removed? Cleter (talk) 14:01, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Texas ranks last in "personal freedom"

Sources: [1], [2]. The study was funded by conservatives. How should this be represented in the article? Viriditas (talk) 22:20, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Maybe something like:

Personal Freedom in Texas

According to a study by the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank [1][2], Texas ranks last in personal freedom among the states. The study assesses various factors contributing to personal freedom, including incarceration rates, cannabis laws, civil asset forfeiture policies, educational freedom, gambling laws, marriage freedom, and travel freedom.

Despite Texas's sixth-place ranking in overall economic freedom, its last-place ranking in personal freedom highlights a potential disparity in the state's approach to economic and personal liberties [1][2]. This disparity has sparked discussions among Texas leaders and policymakers, with some expressing skepticism about the study's findings and others acknowledging the need for further examination of the state's policies in relation to personal freedom.

The study's assessment of Texas's personal freedom ranking provides valuable insights into the state's policies and their impact on individual liberties [1][2]. The contrast between Texas's ranking in personal freedom and its overall economic freedom underscores the complexity of balancing economic and personal liberties in the state. Cleter (talk) 23:30, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

That's fantastic. Viriditas (talk) 23:34, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Corporal Punishment Section in Texas Article

I think the state of Texas does not need a section dedicated to corporal punishment [as opposed to] User:Carlstak. While corporal punishment might be important for Texas's legal system or educational policies, it does not appear to be a defining characteristic or a major focus of the state. The article already covers various aspects of Texas, including its history, geography, economy, culture, and politics. These are broader topics that provide a comprehensive overview of the state, and adding a specific section on corporal punishment may not be necessary for understanding Texas as a whole. Thanks Cleter (talk) 14:14, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

The current write up (it does not have it's own section like you say, just one paragraph), is 57 words, and seems WP:DUE in the summary of education, due to it's unusual prevalence and acceptance. I have added some additional sources to back up it's inclusion as necessary. Cerebral726 (talk) 14:28, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

If that's the case, I suppose it would be necessary in education. Thank you for including sources, this talk may now come to a conclusion. Cleter (talk) 14:34, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

The name Texas...

The backbone of this sentence is: "The name Texas … was applied … by the Spanish to the Caddo themselves …", with four qualifying phrases inserted at three points. Rather tedious to follow and might be broken into two sentences: one saying that it is Caddo, and another saying how the Spanish used it. 2601:642:4600:BE10:A943:306E:D4C8:85A4 (talk) 17:22, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Climate

I think we should highlight somehow, that Texan city doesn’t have a 4 seasons Humid subtropical climate like Atlanta or Charlotte but has a very short winter, And most days throughout February and March has a daytime temperature above 22.

kind of bordering a tropical climate. דולב חולב (talk) 06:21, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

You must clarify the city fellow. Amarillo is definitely not tropical-like as McAllen is.

And you know the rules for tropical classification, all months should have daily mean above 18(or 64 in F?)

I'm gonna make sure that your contributions page is in my watchlist.PAper GOL (talk) 06:27, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

What’s the idea of the last sentence?

it’s a compliment or a threat? 🤔 דולב חולב (talk) 11:25, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Mostly cpompliment, but I cannot do it since I have no idea how watchlists work=)))

Need to take a look at Help:Watchlist page. PAper GOL (talk) 14:00, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Haha cool דולב חולב (talk) 02:00, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

State dog

Texas state dog is the blue lacy 2603:8080:2300:16AA:C46B:647:5A08:35B8 (talk) 05:32, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Please provide reliable sources 2603:8080:D03:89D4:A12C:2B12:91E3:7B (talk) 23:24, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

It's an improvement

@Nikkimaria it's an improvement HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 01:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

(For reference, this is the diff being discussed). No, it's not - it's ungrammatical, repetitive, and introduces stylistic problems. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:57, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Tell me how it's ungrammatical. Just about every Wikipedia page about a u.s. state is written like how I did my edit. Example on the page about California: "California is a state in the Western United States". Why shouldn't the first sentence on this page say "Texas is a state in the South Central region of the United States". And if it's repetitive because I mentioned South Central region two times, we can shorten it the second time by just saying "the most populous state in the region" for short instead of "the most populous state in the South Central region". And the part where I said Texas was an independent country instead of independent Republic, both are true so I don't see how that part is ungrammatical HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 02:05, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

For example, you wrote: "It the most populous state". That is not a grammatically correct statement. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:10, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Oh I said "it the most" instead of "it is the most". You could've just added the word "is" if I accidentally skip over a word and make a grammar error HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 02:14, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

If that was the only issue, I would have. But on the whole, restoring the previous correct version was the better option. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:18, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

tell me everything wrong with my edit, and in my next edit I'll fix all the problems HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 02:27, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

I have added the unproblematic change. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:57, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

ok HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 03:01, 20 November 2024 (UTC)