Talk:Midwestern United States

See also: Wikipedia:WikiProject United States regions

the war

the war was started in 2001 and it ended in 2014 204.184.214.42 (talk) 13:22, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Main Photos

I think it would be more appropriate to add a photo of an Upper Midwestern park, city, or landmark, as the region appears underrepresented in the photographs. For example, Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore, Apostle Islands National Lakeshore, Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, or Isle Royale National Park. A photo of a historic copper mine or lake freighter. I do not think it is necessary to have both the wheat belt and corn belt pictured. Dionysus240 (talk) 16:10, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Bias

This article contains bias and will be marked as such. There is still controversy on what the midwest is. For instance, some call Buffalo midwest. See https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-29/where-is-the-midwest-here-s-what-you-told-us 2600:1700:5BD0:4400:B936:31E3:4413:4A85 (talk) 17:24, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

The Bloomberg article you cite doesn't really prove your point. There are only four areas outside the states in the Census Bureau definition. Three of them are immediately adjacent and the one in southeast Oklahoma has 50%-80% agreement. The other areas outside those states have less than 50% agreement by their inhabitants. I do agree that the article could go into more detail about the fuzziness of the boundary areas and the question of whether state boundaries should be used to define it. But given the inevitable subjectivity involved, using an official government definition is not unreasonable. Indyguy (talk) 18:27, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

the anonymous editor has not explained where the "bias" lies, nr does he tell us what an unbiased text would look like. It's a poor argument made much worse by the threatening tone. Rjensen (talk) 19:51, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

It was well explained. 2600:1700:5BD0:4400:C1F5:C42D:C4AC:8581 (talk) 04:18, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

No, it's not explained well, and you still have not offered text to go in the article. Alanscottwalker (talk) 22:18, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

The IP shows no systemic bias and the article does not support it. Moreover, the unscientific survey provides no definition, at all, let alone different definitions. Alanscottwalker (talk) 22:12, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

The "definition" is based on consensus, not science. I would recommend rather than opinion-bombing talk then prematurely sabotaging a bias template, that you let discussion play out. There is no consensus as you state, sorry. 2600:1700:5BD0:4400:C1F5:C42D:C4AC:8581 (talk) 04:18, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

No. Your article provides no definition and is based on an unscientific survey, meaning no statistical controls. Alanscottwalker (talk) 22:08, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

It appears that the bickering here is the direct inevitable result of the fact that no single accurate geographic definition of Midwest is possible -- and expectations that state lines can always serve as approximate boundaries leads to unfortunate outcomes. Best to accept that fact and proceed accordingly in the article. Here's some help with the western edges, where following state lines leads to outright silliness:

Jon K. Lauck, ed. 2019. The Interior Borderlands: Regional Identity in the Midwest and Great Plains. The Center for Western Studies

"Where does the Midwest end and the Great Plains begin? And does it matter? The authors of essays in this latest collection from the Center for Western Studies believe such questions are important to understanding how regional identity forms and persists--or erodes and even disappears." Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 05:44, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

Your statement also provides no definition, as for "single" definitions, this article already provides several definitions and nothing is preventing more sourced content to be added. -- Alanscottwalker (talk) 22:13, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

"Your statement also provides no definition." Of course not: central to core understanding the topic is that no single accurate geographic definition of Midwest is possible, and chasing such a chimera is doomed to failure. The article requires text of elucidation. — As a native Illinoisan who has also lived in Iowa, Missouri and Wisconsin (and places far from the Midwest), my notion of midwestern is probably pretty "good". However, there can be no guarantee -- and it would not be expected -- that my notion corresponds with great precision to that of any other native of my home town, much less to notions of midwesterners from further afield (or of outsiders). Where the disagreements? Hard to believe that anyone would question Dayton OH or Blue Springs MO or Marion IL or Janesville WI being in the Midwest. But using the Census Bureau map as a touchstone, venture E, W, S, N from those points and consensus will eventually weaken, then break down, most markedly in the western reaches shoe-horned into the Midwest by adherence to state lines as boundaries, but also to the E, N and, pretty quickly, to the S. — Bref: while text elucidating the variegated inadequacies of a few definitions can be helpful in the body of the article, the existence of indeterminacies inherent to The Midwest Marches must be made clear in the lead. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 23:38, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Your comment is all over the place, you begin by saying it can't be defined, which would suggest that we delete the article entirely as unexplainable. Then you say people know what it definitely is because they definitely will say some places like Dayton or Blue Springs are there. In fact, there are several definitions already in the article with sources, so yes it can be defined and you are plainly wrong about that. (As for your personal experiences, they are worse than irrelevant, nothing here is looking for your personal ideas of what you think you understand). As for the edges, those are already discussed in the lead. The lead already talks expressly "in general" (not in 'must be'), and talks about what's on the edges (the Great Lakes are on the edges, Appalachia is on the edges, the Great Plains are on the edges) Even taking for granted there are other regions (like the Great Lakes Region, Appalachia, Great Plains) nothing would make them any more definite than the Midwest, and certainly nothing would prevent overlap of regions. Alanscottwalker (talk) 13:54, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

"you begin by saying it can't be defined" No, I didn't. "Then you say people know what it definitely is because they definitely will say some places like Dayton or Blue Springs are there" No, that's not what I said. "[...] can't be defined, which would suggest that we delete the article entirely as unexplainable" Actually, if it were true that it can't be defined (it isn't), or true even just that no single accurate geographic definition of Midwest is possible (it is), brief well-researched presentation of why that is would make the article all the more informative and interesting. What is it about something that seems so simple at first blush that makes it unamenable to the usual binaristic neatly circumscribed pigeon-holing? Why would anyone bother to assemble a book like The Interior Borderlands: Regional Identity in the Midwest and Great Plains, and what insights might it contain? ("This is a special book. Its uniqueness is in part due to the questions it asks: Where does the northern Great Plains end and the upper Midwest begin? In essence, is there a case to build for 'interior borderlands,' the title of the volume? Twenty-two regional experts have taken on this challenge, and the result is a book that rivals any and all other North American regional writings. Don't miss it!"--John R. Wunder, Emeritus Professor of History and Emeritus Director of the Center for Great Plains Studies, University of Nebraska-Lincoln) -- Ma basta. This thread has degenerated. The original unexplained claim of bias is unintelligible as is, but the need to address that person's point re "controversy on what the midwest is" is central to the article and clear for those who choose to grasp the point. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 23:28, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Apologies if this is littering, but I've just come across this in a review of the book cited above.

/On the opening page of the first chapter, Christopher Laingen alerts readers that if they are seeking a definitive answer as to an exact dividing line between the Great Plains and Midwest from this book, they should "prepare for disappointment."

As one drives west from Kansas City, Des Moines, or Minneapolis, eventually there is the sense of leaving one region and entering another, but there is no quick "Aha!" moment that you have crossed into the Great Plains. If the transition between the two regions was easy to identify, such as the Fall Line or the Ohio River, there would be little reason for twentytwo scholars to explore contrasts, schisms, and similarities between them. Some approaches are more successful than others, and the variety of criteria used is refreshing—including low-altitude landscape photography analysis, Jewish in-migration, indigenous cultures, and agricultural challenges./

The Interior Borderlands: Regional Identity in the Midwest and Great Plains ed. by Jon K. Lauck, review by Matthew Engel, Great Plains Quarterly, Vol. 40, pp. 333-334, 2020.[[1]] Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 23:59, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Now you go back go to your "single definition" comment which has already been refuted. We present a common definition (common definition does not mean everyone agrees with it, it just means it is common) and other definitions and already identify the Great Plains as on the border. And that there is a great deal of variation throughout the Midwest, as well as commonalities. And why would anyone think regions, including the Midwest are simple, it certainly does not appear simple in this long article, reflecting the extensive literature. (For example, why would anyone back in the 1800s refer to Kansas and Nebraska as the Midwest, even though they are in part in the Great Plains, but they did, and that is what we report in this article.) The very word, suggests in the middle and to the west of something else, well as vague as that is, that is the case in the sense this article discusses. Moreover, even if not every inch of those states are in the Great Plains, and if none of those states are in every inch in the Midwest (if you believe that there must be a great divide, and they can't overlap) that makes those states not one or the other, but both, Midwestern and Great Plains. -- Alanscottwalker (talk) 13:25, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Lower Midwest -> Cultural Overlap

Why does "Lower Midwest" under sub-regions in the infobox link to cultural overlap? Pineappman (talk) 05:56, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

I don't know, but my guess is that it's since Lower Midwest and Upper Midwest can be quite different in some cultural aspects, a nod to the overlap of (Upper) Southern culture and Lower Midwest is potentially informative. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 15:53, 17 November 2023 (UTC)