Jump to content

Talk:Ozarks

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:The Ozarks)

Map

[edit]

I've put a picture on the main article showing where they are in the USA. The current picture isn't very helpful to anyone not familiar with where those states are! If anyone has a similar picture to the one I've added on there (lifted from lower down this discussion page), but with just the Ozarks on then I think that would more desirable Cxk271 (talk) 21:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

origin of name

[edit]

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)[reply]

"The Ozarks", not "Ozark"

[edit]

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." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tewilliams (talk • contribs) 06:01, 31 March 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I grew up in the Ozarks (in Rolla), and I never heard it called the "Ozark" until I saw the edits made by 73.96.44.53 today (September 1, 2022). 128.187.112.28 (talk) 16:35, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]


Hunting and fishing

[edit]

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)[reply]

Local Names

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

ArkSoutherner, I moved to Southwest Missouri from the upper Midwest and I can definitely tell the difference. Have some friends that live in Tennessee and Kentucky and I'd say that the Ozark accent definitely different. It's something of an amalgamation of the sort of flat Midwest/ St. Louis speech (which I myself speak) and the more stereotypically "Southern" Kentucky/ Tennessee/ Mississippi drawl. I noticed right away that it wasn't quite "Southern". Although, maybe it's different in Arkansas than Missouri because the culture there is more entrenched as being "Southern"? I.E., your major city in Arkansas is Little Rock, which shares more with Memphis and other Southern cities than does St. Louis, which is pretty darned Midwestern, so people tend to sound more like people in St. Louis in Missouri and more like people from Little Rock in Arkansas. I dunno, just a thought. Is there any research done on this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.2.164.32 (talk) 08:54, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any chance/source that "Ozarks" could be derived from name of native "Osage" Nation? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osage_Nation and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osage_River Bigshotnews 08:27, 5 December 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigshotnews (talk • contribs)

Geology

[edit]

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

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

Ozarks Mountain Country

[edit]

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)[reply]

ADS-L as reference

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

concerning the translation of aux arks

[edit]

When referring to direction, á 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) I believe that the proper derivation of "Ozarks" would come from a corruption of the french words Aux Arcs meaning with bows similar to the Lakhota Sans Arcs meaning without bows. So the name may not have been in reference to "Toward Arkansas" but meaning that the Indians in the region had bows and arrows. Therefore aux arcs being corrupted to O-Zarks--Ozarks.69.29.64.176 (talk) 21:48, 8 July 2008 (UTC)kit parrish 1647 8 July 2008.[reply]

I grew up in the Ozarks and my grandparents were from Ozark, Arkansas, a place I have visited often. I've never heard that Ozark stood for "toward Arkansas" and believe this is incorrect. In the case of Ozark, Arkansas, at least, the "aux arc" referred to the "bend" or "bow" in the river that the town was formed around. With respect to the general region, I suspect that the the term may have referred to the shape of the hills themselves, that is, "in/at/among the arcs (hills)". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.190.75.173 (talk) 04:54, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

[edit]

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.

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)[reply]


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

Sounds like an improvement to me too, except it's worth noting that most of the Ozarks region is upland but not especially mountainous--local relief over much of the region is limited to hills that rise only 50 to 150 feet above the nearby land. 65.213.77.129 (talk) 18:39, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good change, and I agree on changing "mountainous" to "upland". Some o.r. not suited for the article -- I recently overheard two soldiers stationed at Ft. Leonard Wood, one saying to the other, "They're called the Ozark Mountains, but they're more like the Ozark Hills." He must have been from someplace where the mountains are more majestic. That's not to say that there aren't abrupt and dramatic changes in elevation, not least among which is the Devil's Bend area adjacent to FLW. I once read an online journal of a cross-country bicycle trek in which the rider/author cursed the Ozark roads as being steeper than anything he'd encountered in the Appalachians even though they don't rise nearly as high. --Kbh3rdtalk 03:21, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Uh, we just agreed with a two-year old change. I guess time passes slowly in these hills. ;-) --Kbh3rdtalk 03:32, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think...

[edit]

This is a well covered topic but hard to understand... they should work on that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.224.214.209 (talk) 04:52, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was moved. --BDD (talk) 18:59, 8 March 2013 (UTC) (non-admin closure)[reply]

The Ozarks → Ozarks – "The Ozarks" implies that "The" is part of the name of the mountains. It's not, not any more than "The Alps" is of the Alps (note The Alps redirects there). The correct name of the area is the Ozarks, not The Ozarks, and the name of the article shouldn't imply otherwise. The Bushranger One ping only 02:13, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.


Request for something to go in table at side of the article

[edit]

The article on the Appalachian Mountains has a table in the top right hand article mentioning the states the mountains are in; could this article have a similar table? ACEOREVIVED (talk) 15:10, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. I added one. Brandonrush Woo pig sooie! 18:50, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 9 external links on Ozarks. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:16, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 8 external links on Ozarks. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:52, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ozarks. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:14, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Ozarks. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:25, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Page rename undone

[edit]

The article was recently moved/renamed Ozark plateaus with no discussion. I have returned it to Ozarks as that is what the region is known as. Please discuss. Vsmith (talk) 13:55, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Weather

[edit]

What’s the weather like in the Ozarks 47.155.241.12 (talk) 19:09, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Ozark (TV series) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 08:20, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Media and Culture Theory - MDC 254

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 29 August 2022 and 9 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Abswag2121.

— Assignment last updated by Miasav03 (talk) 14:15, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Native American influence and culture

[edit]

I expected some discussion about the Native American people's of the Ozark region to be included. Im sure there were Native American peoples there as most of the names used are from Native American origin. What tribes, were there anything unique about them, etc. 2601:981:4301:43E0:C554:8E3:E688:894F (talk) 13:15, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ozarks&oldid=1212724737"