Talk:American West/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Proposed categories

Proposed sub-category and sub-sub-categories for the category Regions of the United States:

States within the American West

66.167.139.165 06:06, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC): The map and the article claim that the following states are western: Arizona California Colorado Idaho Kansas Montana Nebraska Nevada New Mexico North Dakota Oklahoma Oregon South Dakota Texas Utah Washington Wyoming. Those I've struck out as well as the orange "Sometimes included with the West" Mississippi River states shouldn't even be mentioned.

  • Thanks for your input. Could you give some reasons for your opinions. Where would you put Dodge City, Kansas, for instance. Or the Badlands of South Dakota? Or what do you make of Nebraska's motto, "Where the West Begins"? Also, I think the reason the orange states are mentioned is that when the continent is divided between "east" and "west", it is usually at the Mississippi River.12.74.168.20 16:31, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Actually, the inclusion of the orange states came because of all of the 19th century historical references that identified the "West" and "Far West" as those states west of the Mississippi. For one of the best known, see Beyond the Mississippi by Albert D. Richardson, 1867: reprint edition, June 1, 1967, by Johnson Reprint Corp, ISBN 0384506704 . Also, the red states came from the very many reference books (history, travel, geographical, etc.), and from the several government web sites I visited in reference to what constituted the West. The yellow states are included because of the few references I found that mentioned Hawaii and Alaska (US Census Bureau, Western Governors Conference, etc.) -CPret 15:38, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Merege with U.S. West at Western United States

This article has serious POV problems. It shoudn't have been created in the first place, the information should have been added to U.S. West— which contrary to this articles' POV is not exclusively about the census bureau region. Either way both articles need to be merged at Western United States, which is where the article should be located under WikiProject U.S. regions naming conventions. Also, I'm removing the Demographics section to the talk page, because it is not only POV, but a source for the adjusted statistics is not given. -JCarriker 20:54, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)

  • I'll try to address your concerns in the subsections below. CPret 17:46, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Do not rename: I strongly object to the title Western United States for this article. Concur with Jmbel below that America vs United States is a red herring. The area is almost univerally know as the American West (see Category:American West). Also, the area identified as the West in the Western United States article is not the conventional definition of the American West. DialUp 14:45, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • This article is a duplicate, this article has always been a duplicate— it was created from a redirect to U.S. West. I will no longer speculate about why it was created (as I feel that despite this article's hostile stance toward the original article it was a mistake for me to reciprocate the hostility), but whatever CPret wanted to say should have been added to U.S. West, the article's title at the time American West was written. It has never been the intention of WikiProject U.S. regions to force the census bureau defintion on articles, the designation existed to distinguish regions that had census bureau defintions from ones that did not. Regardless that hierarchy has since been abolished. The only time the WikiProject has not recomend flexibility is when a concreate national model for regions is needed, something that should not apply in indivual regions articles, and is rarely needed elsewhere. Even when the hierarchy was in force, differening views were not opposed. Just review the history of what is now the Southern United States article, to see how the exceptions and variations seciton in that article has not only survived but thrived, during the WikiProject's existence. If it had been our intention not to include differing views, why wouldn't that section's removal at least have been brought up?
      Since this debate is becoming quite long, I'm consolidating my current postion here.Please don't break up the post, but post after it.:
      1. US West is not an exclusive page about the US Census region there was histoical, cultural, and geographic information in the version of U.S. West before American West was written. The fact that differences and variations were included, in U.S. West (Alaska & Hawaii), U.S. South, and U.S. Northeast, proves that the articles were not taking the census definition as the only definition.
      2. The American West article should never have been created it was an existing redirect to U.S. West, which per a above was not exclusively about the Census region. If CPret had a problem with the article title he should have made a post on U.S. West's talk page, and discussed the matter, as I have. Not created a duplicate article.
      3. Both articles should be merged to Western United States, there should never have been two articles in the first place. All other U.S. regional articles with directions in thier name are now located at similar titles, e.g.Northern United States.
      4. Demographics section is POV, original research, and unsourced. CPret has now, provided the source of the section. I am proposing a compromise on the the demographics section, dropping the Oringal reseach claim, in favor of removing POV. See: Demographics Compromise -JCarriker 05:24, Jun 11, 2005 (UTC)
      • I still don't see a reason for using the less familiar name. Also, I don't see anything particularly hostile. The article has only one sentence that mentions the U.S. Census Bureau, and from checking the Census Bureau page, it seems correct. You could have saved me a couple of hours looking into this matter if you had just acknowledged that CPret was right. Someone first proposed the adoption of US Census Bureau regions as the "official" regions 23 Dec 2003. And Template:U.S. regions, which first identified U.S. West as one of the Census Bureau Regions, was created 9 Jun 2004. CPret had every right to assume it was a Census Region page. As for asking for permission to create a page: Who ever does that? Who has the authority to give permission anyway? Redirects are created everyday for subjects that don't yet have articles. I've done it myself. DialUp 19:21, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
        • Someone proposed using the census regions as a standard, and also created Template:U.S. regions. You know who? Me. I've been involved with the WikiProject from the begining which is how I know CPret's interpretation of it policy are wrong. No one has said CPret didn't have a right to make assupmtions, and no one has said permission is needed to create articles. I would appreciate it if you would not put words in my mouth. CPret's assumption that the article was exclusively about the Census region is wrong. The wikiprojects policy as of Jun 22, 2004, the latest version before this article was created, says Emphasis should be placed on the Census Bureau only when a fixed national grouping is necessary. The census regions should never be used to exclude a state from or lock it permanently into a region. Discussion about the diversity of regions, and their interpretations even in Census Bureau articles. The Census infoboxes exist to portray census information, not represent various interpretations of the region as Non-Census infoboxes do. Further more the article is hostile to the Census bureau's defintion and the problems it creates. The definition he offfers excludes other interpretation and even attacks an alternative defintion,- the Census bureau saying for example Texas' in the South causes problems. Though it be of a suprise to you and CPret there are millions of Texas who are perfectly happy to be part of the South. Any fair person will tell you that Texas is part of both the South and the West. The same goes for Oklahoma, and Kansas and above for the Midwest. As for naming conventions it does not violate them. Specificity can be used over polularity see:Jefferson National Expansion Memorial, and the meaning is widely known. It seems that you and CPret are objecting to differnet views of what constitutes the West. Surely this isn't the case, is it? -JCarriker 09:10, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

US West is not an exclusive page about the US Census region

Yes it is. The second sentence clearly states that it is and the population data confirms it. When I first came across it, it seemed to be part of a Wikiproject to develop articles about all the Census regions and to assign states only to those regions so identified. CPret 17:46, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You are mistaken, I am one of the founders and current Coordinator of that wikiproject and that was never our intent. Its quite the opposite, to ensure that regions are not locked into models and are inclusive of various interprtations and the diversity within regions. The Census Bureau regions, is only one defintion and they are only to be used when a concrete defintion is needed. The infoboxes exist to give information about the region, where census bureau regions apply. If, it was our intention to force this defintion on articles, the varations and exceptions section would have been removed from U.S. South, now located at Southern United States. The second sentence says, "As defined by the Census Bureau, the Western region of the United States includes 13 states:..." it does not say the region has only 13 states. -JCarriker 23:53, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)
  • I'm sorry for the delay in getting back. I seldom contribute to Wikipedia anymore unless someone tells me something needs my attention. Why you wish to discuss my thinking for creating the article instead of the merits puzzles me. First, the page (as referenced in your history link) stated (and still states) that it is a Census Bureau region; the only states included were those within the Census Bureau and with no other supporting evidence; the article had nothing showing a common history, culture, or geography linking those states together (indeed it admits that Alaska and Hawaii have little or no commonality with the others); and as it had no reference so I couldn’t check the accuracy of any of its statements. Also the table had (and still has) a list of statistics applying only the the Census Bureau region and compiled from unknown sources (although I would assume the population figures are from a Census Bureau compiled report). Secondly the Wikiprojects page dating from that time specifically calls for both Census Bureau Regions and Non-Census Bureau Regions. The American West (a non-Census Bureau region) was redirected toward a Census Bureau region and accordingly needed an article. I even attempted to include a map following the guidelines of the project page. CPret 02:29, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The American West article should never have been created

There was no American West article at that time. Under the Wikipedia naming conventions, an article is to be given its most common name. The American West is the most common and well known name for a recognized area of the United States and needed an article. The US West article was not it, as it was entirely about a Census Bureau division only peripherally related to the American West. CPret 17:46, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The U.S. article had cultural, political, and geographic inforfmation in the article as its version before you made American West, which was a redirect to U.S. West. clearly shows. It still does.-JCarriker 23:53, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)

Both articles should be merged to Western United States

The Western United States is not the common name for the American West. Western United States is a general area which could be anywhere in the western United States—more of a dictionary term than a name for an encylcopedia article. The American West is a standard term and, as found in most scholarly books and popular literature, currently refers to those states west of the first tier of states west of the Mississippi River (See Additional reading section of main article for partial list of references to that effect). Historically it also referred to all of the states west of the Mississippi. The West (but not the American West) in early American history also referred to many regions—west of the Alleghenies; west of the Appalachians; what is now know as the Midwest; the old Northwest Territories; etc. Perhaps some of the Western United States article could be merged here. CPret 17:46, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Sir, Western Unites States is a common name, more over United States, not America is the International name for our country, and this is an interantional encyclopedia. Your defintion is common, but no more so than the censu bureau definition, likewise theri are other varations, all of the states West of the Mississippi, removing the Mid-Western states but keeping Texas and Oklahoma, keeping the Census defintion but exlcuding the Pacific states, moving NM, CO, WY, &MT into the Central region, and these are only the modern versions. You are right that a nod to the fact that every thing east of the Original 13 States, FL, ME, and VT has at sometime been the West. The West has continued to evolve so much so that the second tier of states West of the Mississippi are no longer universally considered the West and that some people in the Pacific states, embrace a seperate identity. -JCarriker 23:53, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)
  • World-wide, both America and American refer to the United States or to things relating to the United States, so I'm unconvinced. Even if that confusion was true, Wikipedia requires things be named according to their common and most well-know name and further requires editors to use that English which conforms to the country in which the subject originates. Although I agree that censorship has its place, in my opinion this is not one of them. Too, the western in western United States is almost never capitalized in common use: a sure sign it is not a proper name. Also, of all the modern references I checked before I created the article, none of them restricted the West to 13 states, so I feel that statement to be incorrect. CPret 02:29, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • I think that both "American West" and "Western United States" are perfectly clear. One should redirect to the other, and both names should be in the lead. Personally, it's a matter of indifference to me which way around, but if we have a WikiProject standard, we should follow it. I do think the issue about "American" not always meaning "U.S." is a red herring here: I'm not aware of any English-speaking country where "American West" does not basically mean "Western United States"; the only difference I'm aware of is that the former is less likely to include the Pacific Coast states (or at least their western portions) and never includes Alaska and Hawaii. So if those 5 states are going to be in the article, I guess "Western United States" is a better title (yes, I'm slightly contradicting what I wrote a few sentences back about being indifferent). -- Jmabel | Talk 17:52, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)

Demographics section is POV, original research, and unsourced

I can't see how United States Census data can be POV, original research, or unsourced. However, see With all due respect below. CPret 17:46, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Most of it is not census data but your own compilations using census data. See With all due respect -JCarriker 23:53, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC) & 02:53, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)

Demographics

The demographics for the West are complicated by United States Census Bureau's reporting system. In the 2000 Census, the Census Bureau included the state with the second largest Hispanic population, Texas, in the South region, included the state with the second largest American Indian population, Oklahoma, also in the South, and included the Dakotas, with their large populations of Plains Indians, in with the Midwest region.

Statistics from the 2000 United States Census show the seventeen states in the West had a population of 91,457,622, including 1,611,447 Indians, or 1.8% of the total, and 22,377,288 Hispanics (the majority Mexican), or 24.5% of the total. Indians comprise 0.9% of all Americans, and Hispanics, 12.5%. Asians, important from the very beginning in the history of the West, totaled 5,161,446, or 5.6%, with most, not surprisingly, living in the Far West. Blacks, whose contributions to the West are well documented, totaled 5,929,968, or 6.5%--lower than the national proportion (12.8%). The highest concentration (12%) of black residents in the West is found in Texas--the only Western state in which slavery was established.

The West is still one of the most sparsely settled areas in the United States with 49.5 inhabitants per square mile (19/km²). Only Texas with 78.0 inhabitants/sq mi. (30/km²), Washington with 86.0 inhabitants/sq mi. (33/km²), and California with 213.4 inhabitants/sq mi. (82/km²) exceed the national average of 77.98 inhabitants/sq mi. (30/km²). Wyoming has the lowest population density in the West with only 5 inhabitants per square mile (2/km²).

These maps from the 2000 US Census highlight differences in population groups between East and West.
These maps from the 2000 US Census highlight differences in population groups between East and West.

With all due respect

The source for the illustrations and census figures is clearly referenced in the Demographics section itself as well as the External links section. For the convienience of those who don't have the time to do the reasearch the original sources, I've added the following table generated from my spreadsheet. All transcription errors are my own (mathmatical errors belong to Microsoft). CPret 17:46, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

While I try to assume good faith, one gets the impression you hold great disdain for the Census Bureau's defintion by reading the article, and that the article and statitics were created and compiled to go around the other article, possibly even to displace it. That is the POV, not including alternate defintions but the manner and tone in which you chose to do it. The caption included with the minority distribution maps is a good example of the POV, "These maps from the 2000 US Census highlight differences in population groups between East and West." It does not, it shows the national distribution of minorites. It highlight the difference between Ease and West in so much as it does the differences between north and south, and Maine and Kentucky. You have just admitted that it is original research you created the region's defintion and in compiled the statisics. It was unsourced as it did not say who adjusted the statistics. The census bureau is also not the source, you are because you compiled the statistics you use in the article, they compiled the statistics you used to compile yours based on you defintion not theirs. If National Geographic has done this, or more likely the Western Governor's Conference, which Oklahoma is not a member of, it would be acceptable from a respected third party source, but not by your or my doing. -JCarriker 23:53, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)
  • I have to confess I understand little of what you are saying. I've changed "Adjusted statistics show the West in 2000" to read "Statistics from the 2000 United States Census show the seventeen states in the West". That should end any confusion. So far you have not objected to the accuracy of anything. POV and disdain remind my of an old lawyering gambit—if you don't have the facts, argue the emotion. Obfuscation and personal attacks fall in a similar vein. If you have found specific errors, let me know. I'll try to get you the page and paragraph of the source or change the entry. CPret 02:29, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC) PS. Please be patient. When I recover, I may return to regular contributing, but at present I do not always feel like researching topics. CPret 02:54, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Since the demographics section proved to be neither original research nor unsourced, and no POV issues were identified, I'm putting the section back in the main article for now. CPret 15:40, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
State Area *Population *Indian *Hispanic *Asian *Black Density, pop/mi2
Arizona 113,909 5,130,632 255,879 1,295,617 92,236 158,873 45
California 158,693 33,871,648 333,346 10,966,556 3,697,513 2,263,882 213
Colorado 104,247 4,301,261 44,241 735,601 95,215 165,063 41
Idaho 83,557 1,293,953 17,645 101,690 11,899 5,456 15
Kansas 82,264 2,688,418 24,936 188,252 46,806 154,198 33
Montana 147,138 902,195 56,068 18,081 4,691 2,692 6
Nebraska 77,227 1,711,263 14,896 94,425 21,931 68,541 22
Nevada 110,540 1,998,257 26,420 393,970 90,266 135,477 18
New Mexico 121,666 1,819,046 173,483 765,386 19,255 34,343 15
North Dakota 70,665 641,200 31,329 7,786 3,606 3,916 9
Oklahoma 69,919 3,450,654 273,230 179,304 46,767 260,968 49
Oregon 96,981 3,421,399 45,211 275,314 101,350 55,662 35
South Dakota 77,047 754,844 62,283 10,903 4,378 4,685 10
Texas 267,339 20,851,820 118,362 6,669,666 563,319 2,404,566 78
Utah 84,916 2,233,169 29,684 201,559 37,108 17,657 26
Washington 68,192 5,894,121 93,301 441,509 322,335 190,267 86
Wyoming 97,914 493,782 11,133 31,669 2,771 3,722 5
Totals 1,832,214 91,457,662 1,611,447 22,377,288 5,161,446 5,929,968 50
*All population figures are from the 2000 Census Briefs available online at US Census Bureau Briefs.

I don't think there is an issue of original research here. Original research would be if CPret went out and conducted his own census or survey. Recombining legitimately gathered census data is not original research in the sense denigrated by Wikipedia policies. -- Jmabel | Talk 17:56, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)

Food for thought

Some maps of how some reputable sources define the West. -JCarriker 07:20, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

Demographics compromise

I disagree about this not being original research, but as I am more concerned with NPOV, and in the interest of moving forward I'm proposing a compromise:

Include the total populations for the, cenusus defintion, the second tier defintion, and first tier defintion. I never had a problem with the facts about individual states (e.g. Texas 12% African-American), which used information directly.- JCarriker 04:21, Jun 11, 2005 (UTC)

  • If I understand that correctly, that you are saying that at the bottom of the chart we would give one line each to totals based on the different definitions of the region, that sounds reasonable (and informative). -- Jmabel | Talk 21:41, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

Redirect

JCarriker has now merged a lot of this content to Western United States. It seems to me that the best thing to do would be either to turn this article into a redirect or to turn it into a disambiguation between that page and a new page dealing with "the West" is a cultural construct and myth. I'm going to leave at least a few days for comment before I act on this. -- Jmabel | Talk 16:23, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)

It seems to mes that the best place to discuss the Western mythos indepth would be at Wild West. Which of course could be linked via Western United States or through a disambig. -JCarriker 16:32, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)
Probably so, although if we do so, I suspect we will find ourselves adding some of the less wild side of the West, too. -- Jmabel | Talk 16:41, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)
  • I totally disagree. I think maybe you are attempting to change the American West into an area defined simply by its geography. It isn't. The American West, both the United States and widely around the world, is an iconic region defined by its shared history as well as culture and geography. Not mentioning the romantic nature of the history and culture that turned it into such an icon would be detrimental to understanding the definition of the region. Also, I haven't read the references so I can't be sure, but I don't think your identification of the American West on the new map at Western United States is based on any common definition of the modern West. California and Texas only sometimes considered part of the American West!! And including Hawaii and Alask on equal footing! I'll have to see some credible sources to believe it. A better plan would be to redirect Western United States to Geography of the Western United States and dab that page back to American West. I don't know how you can fix the link at the US Census Bureau page that points to U.S. West without creating a new page though. People clicking links there will be looking for census information about the various census regions. And no one has addressed the categorization problem (Category:American West) that brought me here in the first place. DialUp 19:53, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • The primary motivaton in defining regions has always been, culture, history, and to a lesser extint geography— no one is trying to change this. The simple fact is that both the second and first tiers of states West of the Mississippi, are as much a part of the South (TX,LA,AR,OK,MO) or Midwest (MO,IW,KS,NE,SD,ND,MN) as they are the West. The second tier view is not is not widely accepted, no view of what constitutes the West is. The region most widely used in education today is the Census Bureau region, which is not exclusive to statistics— just go turn on the weather channel if you don't believe me, and I sincerly doubt its definition even approaches consensus.
As for your points:
  • The map:The map shows in red, states that area always, part of the West, and in orange states that may or may not be part of the West. Do you want to return to the Census defintion?
  • Romatic nature: You're right that mentioning Western romanticm is important in the article, so long as it only discusses and does not become an exaple of it as this article did.
  • Credible sources: According to the U.S. government Alaska and Hawaii are part of the West, Texas is not. Some think Texas be incuded, Alaska and Hawaii shouldn't that's equal footing. While the U.S. goverment isn't the end all and be all on the subjects, if it isn't a credible source of U.S. geography, I don't see how anyhting else will be.
  • link at the US Census Bureau- simple, change the link to Western United States and avoid the redirect, the Western United States is about the same subject as U.S. West.
  • Category: There is no point in discussing that until this has been decided. Discussion is planned for the future, go to WP:USR and join as a participant and you'll get a notice when formal discussion begins. Reading the project main page wouldn't hurt you in the debate here either.
It seems to me that the American West deals more with the idea of the region than the actuality of it. As such Western United States is the better title for the regional article. In the meantime I'll be setting on a bayou in Texas thinking about this issue.-JCarriker 08:05, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
  • I guess we disagree. By the way, I lived in Louisana for a while and enjoyed the area and the people, so enjoy yourself. I see this article as being about the iconic region known as the American West; which I feel is important enough to justify an article. I also think the Census Bureau’s West region deserves an article so those interested in Census Bureau data will have a place to go. If one wants to find out about the geographical nature of the USGS's Western United States, the article exists and properly so. If someone wants to write an article about NOAA's regions (whatever their names are), I think that's also a good idea. Weather regions would be suitable topics. But all those regional areas were developed for different purposes than describing the iconic region known as the American West. I don't think they do so or were ever intended to do so and wrong to use as such. Also, I think no consideration has been given to the views of all the editors on this article, to all those who linked pages here, to those of us who have used the categories (all who apparently think this is properly named and about an area they recognize), and to the million of people world-wide who recognize the region by that name and seek information. Also, numerous scholarly articles, books, and government sites use American West for this region. They can't all be wrong. One final request, could you identify exactly which sources you used to develop your map? The references on your new page are from this article and refer only the American West. I haven't read them yet and it would really help me if I don't have to go through them all. To be clear in what I'm asking, the sources you just now supplied don't seem to apply to the American West we're discussing, and I can't tell if you mean your new article to replace the American West article or to be a compilation of areas that could be described as Western United States. DialUp 16:37, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    1. I think everybody is turning this into a bigger deal than it is. In all scenarios, all of the titles will be present either as redirects or as interlinked articles, and all the material will be in here some place (so anyone doing a search will find the material they are looking for). That is ultimately what matters.
    2. I don't have nearly time to address everything that has been said here that I disagree with, but I do want to address one thing: Dialup writes "California and Texas only sometimes considered part of the American West!!" to which my answer is "yup, pretty much." Or, more accurately, only part of each state is generally considered part of the American West. Houston, San Antonio, and Dallas are not Western cities, although El Paso is. San Francisco, San Diego, and Los Angeles are Pacific Coast cities, which is another matter entirely. They are no more part of the culture of the Great Plains and Mountain States than Baltimore and Philadelphia are part of Appalachia. In particular, it is worth noting that California was already quite settled by Europeans when much of the land to its east was still basically Indian territory.
    3. My own take: we should certainly have an article at Western United States that deals with the region broadly, and has a section discussing the various overlapping definitions and who uses them. And, JCarriker, I'm sorry but I don't have a strong opinion on exactly which other articles should also exist: as long as everything is interlinked, I don't seem to share your distress that some articles might possibly duplicate material to be found elsewhere. -- Jmabel | Talk 16:56, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
Actually, its only subjects I don't want duplicated, if American West is changed to be what DialUp wants, I see no need for a redirect or disambig. -JCarriker 19:28, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

Western states

66.167.253.90 21:59, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC): I stumbled on this page while checking out which pages where linking to another article. I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who sees this page as controversial. I think its wrong at its most basic level: the list of states in the infobox. ¿ Louisiana sometimes included with the west ? ¿ Kansas and Nebraska considered part of the west any time after the Civil War ? Sure, as the country's western boundary expanded they were at one time part of the West; at one time the "gateway to the west" was the Cumberland Gap. By that argument every state west of the Appalachian Mountains would be included. After the establishment of the Oregon Territory and the inclusion of the land from the Mexican Cession, the states of the Great Plains and the Midwest acquired new terminology for their region's identity. With all the varying terms for U.S. regions, both historical and present-day, with all of the dimensions implied by such terms (geography, demographics, and culture, for a start), I hope Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. regions grows in charter and participation enough to make sense of it all over time. For now, I'll leave this article be, given its controversy.

Actually, the reference I first gave you when you brought this up back in December of last year was published after the Civil War and referred to all states west of the Mississippi ( ISBN 0384506704 ). I spent several weeks reading books at home, at various libraries writing notes, and scrolling through rolls of microfilm before I wrote the article—all in an effort to properly identify those states identified as the American West and collect the appropriate facts. I believe them (the facts) mostly correct. We all have opinions, including me, but I tried to put the information together as a neutral and accurate reflection of the data. The seventeen states considered part of the American West came from that effort. It appeared the identification of those states arose during the early part of the Twentieth Century, after WWI but before the 30s, and has not changed significantly since then. However, since the time period was never explicly stated in any reference book, it wasn't included in the article. If you have credible sources that indicate otherwise, please include them and we can change the article appropriately. I wasn't looking specifically, so I can't be entirely sure, but, as I stated previously, I never ran across the term American West being used to refer to any state or region east of the Mississippi. A source which states the opposite would be helpful. CPret 15:28, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
66.167.253.18 17:49, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC): Thanks for the serious reply. I am not the one who brought this up in December; my comment was posted the same day I first encountered this article. I checked for the book you cite, and it's a reprint of a book published in 1867, within a couple of years of the Civil War; its too dated to be cited as a key source. Given the existence of Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. regions, I still contend, as I noted at the end of my previous comment, that it would be a good use of that project's time to address this issue. Confining myself to U.S. government and university websites, here are references that I hope demonstrate the two key points I am making: (1) the American West changed as the frontier and the U.S. western boundary changed, and (2) defining the American West as half of the Continental United States is not consistent with present-day use. For the sake of army argument lets say present-day use starts 50 years after the Oregon Territory and the Mexican Cession.
Historical use
Modern use
Thank you for your research. However, I assure you the Wikiproject is addressing this issue, I am it Coordinator. The WikiProject's policies of regional classification is part of what is in play here the other is our naming conventions. You should consider joining wikipedia, by registering a user name.-JCarriker 17:58, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)
66.167.139.50 04:43, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC): Good news, thanks. I'll throw in my two cents there in a moment...
Because both of you signed in the same unique style and both posted from covad.com, I assumed you were the same person. I apologize for the error. I understood you to mean you wanted information for the period following the Civil War. The best source for terms used during historical periods is that literature contemporary to the period. Modern sources will often use historical terms in a modern sense (and vice versa) without saying which term was actually used during the period.
66.167.139.50 04:43, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC): FWIW, the use of four tildes to sign a comment is recommended practice within Wikipedia, unique only to those who try to follow Wikipedia conventions. :-)
I used many of the sites you listed to collect titles for the books I used, but some were new. Thanks. I was unable previously to locate some of the books listed and they may contain information I couldn't access. I don't recall using any of the sites as sources though. Editing standards for some sites are hard to determine and the sites often change with no explanation. The gov sites providing official information are the most accurate. Those providing general information are often not as rigorously controlled and seldom have an author identified; although they may have good information you can check through other sources. Sites providing original documents are also useful. I thought at first one of the sites [1] you listed had information about American West used in historical times to apply to the Ohio Valley. Unfortunately it appears to use the modern designation to describe what modern historian sometimes call the trans-Appalachian West (the land lying generally between the Appalachians and the Mississippi) and no indication it was actually used during the era described.
That reminds me, if you are really looking for which states were considered part of the West after the Civil War, you may want to search for references to Trans-Mississippi West. That term gained some popularity around the turn of the twentieth century for the West—not to be confused with the Trans-Mississippi military district during the Civil War. That district was known as the Southwest. And for those who are determined that Texas is part of the South and never part of the West, Southwest identifed a region with links to the South but not actually considered the South proper. Southwest was used in that manner for most of the twentieth century (sometimes even now), but is also presently used as a substitute name for the Desert Southwest. CPret 14:49, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
66.167.139.50 04:43, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC): Since JCarriker confirmed this is a topic for Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. regions, I'll move any further comments to there, noting only the following suggestion for a resolution that might be compatible with both our views. Since the American West changed over time, the topic is best left with either no maps, or a series of multiple maps. Wikipedia can use an article about how the definition of the American West changed as the frontier moved west, with some states continuing to exemplify the American West culturally (e.g. Texas) which others (e.g. those in the Ohio River Valley]) were western states for only as long as they offered a frontier to European immigrants.
  • The project's talk page does not seem active, so I'll answer here. The previous areas that were called the west should be addressed in Trans-Appalachia; although the Ohio River Valley and Northwest Territory should both have expanded articles if someone gets around to writing them. It also appears that Trans-Mississippi West as a name for the American West came into vogue for a time following the Trans-Mississippi Exposition held in 1898. CPret 15:40, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)