Template:Outline of knowledge coverage

Template:Vital article

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. United States: Texas GA‑class Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States GA This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Texas (assessed as Top-importance). Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Mexico GA‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mexico, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mexico on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MexicoWikipedia:WikiProject MexicoTemplate:WikiProject MexicoMexico GA This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Former countries (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesFormer countries

Template:WP1.0

	Texas has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones Date Process Result August 18, 2006 Featured article candidate Not promoted March 13, 2007 Good article nominee Not listed February 5, 2008 Peer review Reviewed April 28, 2008 Good article nominee Not listed October 31, 2008 Good article nominee Listed November 21, 2008 Peer review Reviewed Current status: Good article

In subsection Race and ethnicity, there is a list of ethnicities. If I sum up all the groups, I end up with a percentage above 100%. I suppose, the group of Europeans is too large in this table. Thanks, Felix — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:638:208:FD4D:0:0:0:1026 (talk) 08:46, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It adds up to 100%; do not include the hispanic/latio number at the end. Kuru (talk) 14:16, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Citation #151 is no longer valid. 209.118.240.2 (talk) 15:17, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is Texas the hottest state in the USA? Well its my favoret state. IM moveing there when Im 18. IM going to Denton. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashlynn Coach (talk • contribs) 17:18, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It ranks up in the very top tier, but at least according to this table, it is not the absolute hottest. http://www.currentresults.com/Weather/US/average-annual-state-temperatures.php

Keep in mind too, that the rankings are based on overall averages, so much will depend on where in the state the city/town/area is located, and even such factors as humidity to take into account and to just how hot it "feels". For instance, roughly two-thirds of the state are in the humid to sub-humid sub-tropical part of the country, so 100 degrees in Lubbock may not "seem" as hot as 100 degrees in Denton. Hope this might have helped a bit! TexasReb (talk) 21:03, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

austin is the capitalo — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.71.43.7 (talk) 16:09, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The end of the history section seems very unsatisfying, and abrupt. I have been trying to write something to add to the end.

Since the 1970s Texas population growth has outpaced that of the nation. Texas had a population of 11,186,730, in 1970, and in 2010, the state's population totalled 25,145,561. One factor leading to this increase was an oil boom in the 1970s. High rates of immigration from latin America, has led to a sharp rise in Texas' hispanic population.

The state's increased population has led to economic diversifation and even more growth. Companies such as Texas Instruments and SBC (now AT&T), have played a large role in the high tech industry. Due to the state's rapid growth, the state's major metropolitan areas have experienced significant suburban sprawl.

I think this is more appropriate for the History of Texas page. But i think it is a start. I really would like suggestions. Thanks. Oldag07 (talk) 07:24, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to let you know that on the state of Texas page.....you have Six Flags over Texas listed as in Grand Prarie...that is incorrect. You can call them or just google their location. Six Flags is in Arlington, Texas.....it's just minutes from the Texas Rangers Ballpark in Arlington and the Dallas Cowboys stadium....all which are in Arlington, Texas.

Thank you, Lisa Whitlock Lwhitlock71 (talk) 23:55, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: Though that particular park is in Arlington, their headquarters are indeed in Grand Prairie. Jackmcbarn (talk) 02:24, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Concur with Mr. McBarn; the passage refers to the holding entity, not that specific park (one of many with that name). Kuru (talk) 13:29, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fourth paragraph down the article says, "A slave state, Texas declared its secession from the United States in early 1861, joining the Confederate States of America 'during' the American Civil War." Shouldn't the end of that sentence have said more accurately and clearly, "...joining the Confederate States of America at the 'start' of the American Civil War." Because didn't Texas join the Confederate States at the very beginning of the war or before? I was confused when I first read the sentence because as far I am aware, and what I've read elsewhere, I thought Texas joined right at the start or earlier and not later during the war? Texas joined the Confederate States in March 2, 1861 and the American Civil War began later, in April 12, 1861. Sam Houston was out of office before the war had even begun so he didn't block Texas' entry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.148.23.227 (talk) 22:00, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is absolutely correct. Texas was one of the charter members of the original 7 state Confederacy, and was indeed a member before the War ever began. So far as Sam Houston goes, it is a little more complicated. He accepted secession, but objected to Texas' entry into the CSA (which in fact had already been approved by the other 6 Lower South states already assembled in Montgomery, Alabama), on the grounds that the secession convention had no power to do so and that, unlike actual secession, it was not put up for a state-wide referendum. Thus, he was deposed from office when he failed to respond after his name was called out three times to come up and take an oath of allegiance to the new Confederate Constitution. But anyway, thanks for bringing all this up! I will take a look at it and do the necessary revisions to make it reflect historical accuracy subject, of course, to the approval of other editors. TexasReb (talk) 18:57, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion, and the accompanying article as it currently stands, fails to reflect the fact that there was never any such thing as the "Confederate States of America", nor was there any secession from the US to establish such. There was an attempt to do so and an accompanying armed rebellion, however the US Constitution does not provide for the secession of any of the nation's member states, and the rebellion (known as the "American Civil War") failed miserably (as decisively demonstrated by Gen. William T. Sherman in his march through the south and by President Lincoln at Appomattox but with consequences, many believe, lasting to this day). The supposed "Confederate States of America" was never recognized by the world powers of the day and therefore never really existed; it was a wholly imaginary figment of the minds of traitorous southerners alone.

Furthermore, it wasn't Texas itself that was re-admitted to the Union in 1870: since there wasn't (and isn't) any such thing as secession from the U.S., Texas never seceded from the U.S., thus it couldn't be re-admitted to the U.S. Rather, it wasn't until 1870 that the Texas citizenry was deemed by the rest of the nation to be sufficiently reformed of its disgracefully traitorous, rebellious ways that the federal government allowed Texans to resume electing their own federal representatives and sending them to Washington, D.C. to participate in national affairs.

The language of the Civil War section of the article at hand has been corrected to reflect the previous obliviousness to or disregard of these historical facts. BLZebubba (talk) 09:25, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As for the remark attached to one of the March 28 edit reversions by Rjensen that "foreign recognition is separate", actually it isn't: recognition by the other nations of the day is the only standard that matters when considering whether a country existed or not; accordingly, since the "Confederate States of America" never attained recognition by Great Britain, France, nor Spain (nor any other country for that matter), there really was (were?) never any "Confederate States of America", the revenues collected by modern nostalgic southern huckster-authors of glorified Civil War pseudo-histories who assert otherwise notwithstanding.