Talk:The Ozarks

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Ozarks article.
Article policies
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

Contents

[edit] origin of name

Removed from article for confirmatin.

According to King Lambird, Southern Illinois University Edwardsville, the name is derived from the early French colonists of Kaskaskia description of the area as Italic textTerre Auz ArcsItalic text or "Land of the Hills."

The English version of the name becoming "The Ozarks."-<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Lupin/navpop.css&action=raw&ctype=text/css&dontcountme=s">-146.163.200.200 18:46, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)King Lambird.

Vsmith 19:00, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

  • I have updated this section with some information from a 1996 article by Lynn Morrow (see citation) that seems to generally agree with most of the (online) reliable information I could find. -- GeoGreg 08:54, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "The Ozarks", not "Ozark"

The title of this page needs to be changed to "The Ozarks" or at least "Ozarks." The geographic region can be called the "Ozark Plateu," although culturally the Ozarks probably does not align perfectly with the borders of the plateau. Culturally, it is not correct to talk about the region as "Ozark" without the "s."

[edit] Copyright Violation

Some text deleted because it was copied, with extremely minor changes, from the Columbia Encyclopedia. Ssterns 20:03, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Hmm... the deleted text has been there since at least mid 2004 before I first viewed/edited the article. Your deletion left a bit of a hole so I filled it in off the top of my head - which is not copyrighted, guess I need to find a backup source (hey, I'm an Ozark hillbilly :-) - Vsmith 00:02, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the copied material has been up for a while (and really should be deleted from the "history" pages as well), but we deal with instances of copied material as we find them. Ssterns 14:32, 30 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Hunting and fishing

I live in the Ozarks and I've gotta say that I have never been forced to supplement my diet with hunting or fishing. Neither does anyone I know. Also, what is the source for the statement in the article?

Fixed that bit. The statement was factual for the early 1900s. When I was growing up in the Ozarks back in the 50s hunting and fishing were essential activities of many of the families I knew. We could add moonshining as a traditional activity also. But I'd have to find some refs to back up my original research :-) Cheers, Vsmith 12:26, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Local Names

On this bit of the article: "One of the attributes of this cultural and dialectic area is that the people have local names for the areas not well-known outside the region. People outside of the Ozarks typically do not refer to areas such as: Boston Mountains in the Arkansas Ozarks. White River Hills along the Missouri-Arkansas border; Shepherd of the Hills Country around Branson, Missouri; Irish Wilderness located in south central Missouri; Boston Mountains of Arkansas; and Cookson Hills in Oklahoma."

I'm not sure I understand. All these names are on USGS maps and seems pretty established. It sounds like the article is saying that these places have local names different from those used outside the region. That doesn't seem be to true. If the article is saying that there are names for regions of the Ozarks that are not well known outside the Ozarks, well, that is true of every region in the world. How many people from the Ozarks have heard of Dark Divide mountains of Washington State, for example? And anyway, the Boston Mountains, especially, are not exactly unheard of outside the region. Doesn't everyone know they are where the Ozarks reach their highest elevations? (or at least those with some interest in mountains and geography) Pfly 16:40, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

SOmething needs to be said about Wal-Mart.They are headquartered in Bentonville, Arkansas, centrally located in the Ozarks.

I have lived in the Ozarks all my life, and I have never heard this distinct "accent" mentioned in the article...The only accent I have heard is a Southern drawl. I can't really separate the dialect from the Ozarks from anywhere else in the South; I mean people sound the same here as in Tennessee or Mississippi or wherever; I've never noticed a difference.ArkSoutherner 17:36, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Geology

Shouldn't there be a section about the geology/origin of the mountains? 72.75.22.31 18:05, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Go for it. Cardsplayer4life 20:41, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ozarks Mountain Country

This is a term used to describe the region in media. The spelling is often corrupted to "Ozark Mountain Country", but this is incorrect because when used as an adjective, "Ozarks" is proper. Place names using "Ozark" such as "Ozark Mountains" are correct. There may be exceptions that I am unaware of. Snafflekid 01:15, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ADS-L as reference

This newly added reference, [1], links to an unmoderated email forum (described here [2]), which doesn't seem to satisfy Wikipedia:Reliable sources, no? Pfly 23:55, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I am not certain about whether or not Wikipedia considers it a reliable source. It would seem to pass the no original research and NPOV test, and the statements are made by people who should be within a linguistics community, and their email addresses are included. I don't know when someone should or should not be considered an expert. Maybe it is simply an obvious fact that the etymology of Ozarks is in dispute, and needs no source. I intend to cite the rest of the section, i ran short on time. Snafflekid 02:14, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Yea, I agree that it is a debated thing. Just being a wiki-pedant. :) Wikipedia:Reliable sources/examples#Use of electronic or online sources seems to nix the ADS-L mailing list. I'll look for a better source; I'm sure there are some out there! Pfly 02:38, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] concerning the translation of aux arks

When referring to direction, รก in French is the correct translation of to or into in English. Also, there is a fair amount of comingling of English and French usage of the phrase aux Arks during the period and the argument of proper grammar or article-noun agreement is not necessarily appropriate to the meaning. Even the spelling of Arkansas was not standardized, nor is it plural, but the usage of aux was followed, regardless. Fur trappers were not linguists. Remember, aux provides the liaison for Arks as well.Snafflekid 01:50, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Only (major/extensive) (highland/mountainous) region between Appalachians and Rockies?

This article initially made the statement that the Ozarks were the only major highland region between the Appalachians and the Rocky Mountains. That statement is similar to the statement made by the Online Encyclopedia Britannica where it says "...the Ozarks are the only extensive elevated area between the Appalachian and Rocky mountain ranges." http://secure.britannica.com/ebi/article-9276237 At the following link the U.S. Forest Service states that "Together, the Ouachita and Ozark Mountains form an area known as the Interior Highlands, the only major mountainous region between the Appalachians and the Rockies." http://www.srs.fs.usda.gov/4106/about/HotSpringsOffice.htm

The Ozarks, Ouachitas, Black Hills, and Sawtooths.
The Ozarks, Ouachitas, Black Hills, and Sawtooths.

Later this Wikipedia article on the Ozarks was qualified by the addition of the Black Hills. Then the Ouachita Mountains were added to the list. And most recently the Sawtooth Mountains of Minnesota have been added, citing these four areas the only major highland areas between the Appalachians and the Rockies. At this rate, no doubt more local hills, mountains, and upland areas will be added to the list (e.g. Mesabi Range and Vermillion Range of Minnesota, Barron Hills and Baraboo Range of Wisconsin, Wichita Mtns of Oklahoma, Texas Hill Country, etc., etc., etc). The unique area size characteristic of the Ozarks that the original statement was designed to make has been diluted with each qualifying addition.

While the Ozarks are clearly not the only upland area or mountains between the Appalachians and Rockies, they are by a wide margin the most extensive. Calculating the areas comprising the 4 areas currently mentioned in the article from EPA Ecoregion IV definitions shows that the Ozarks cover 46,552 square miles, the Ouachitas 10,384 square miles, the Black Hills 5,381 square miles, and the Sawtooths of Minnesota (North Shore Highlands) 1,139 square miles (the Sawtooths area barely visible in the accompanying map).

So, is it inaccurate to say that the Ozarks are the only major/extensive highland or mountainous region between the Appalachians and the Rockies? It depends on one's definition of "major" or "extensive." In a relative sense, such a statement is true....the Ozarks cover 5 times as much area as the Ouachitas, 10 times as much as the Black Hills, and 41 times as much area as the Sawtooths. In an absolute sense it is not as clear. Are the 5,381 square miles of the Black Hills a major or extensive area?...possibly. Are the 1,139 square miles of the Sawtooths major or extensive?...probably not.

The forgoing has led me to edit the article with the following statement: "The Ozark Highlands area, covering nearly 47,000 square miles, is by far the most extensive mountainous region between the Appalachian and Rocky Mountains." Further discussion is invited.

Tosborn 02:47, 21 August 2007 (UTC)


Sounds good to me. Grey Wanderer | Talk 16:24, 21 August 2007 (UTC)