Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. Updates on reimplementing the Graph extension, which will be known as the Chart extension, can be found onPhabricator and onMediaWiki.org.
This article iswritten inAmerican English, which has its own spelling conventions (color,defense,traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from othervarieties of English. According to therelevant style guide, this should not be changed withoutbroad consensus.
Texas was one of theGeography and places good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet thegood article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can berenominated. Editors may also seek areassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to theUnited States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Mexico, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofMexico on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.MexicoWikipedia:WikiProject MexicoTemplate:WikiProject MexicoMexico
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Former countries, a project which is currently considered to beinactive.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesFormer countries
Result: I'm going close this discussion as delist. The issues that I pointed out still exist, and would most certainly result in an automatic fail if an article like this were nominated for GA. Aside from the obvious, I would recommend condensing the lead to four paragraphs, and condensing the history section (especially the Pre-European era and Colonization subsections) the Demographics section, and the politics sections, as well as minor condenses throughout the entire article where necessary. This does not, however, mean that a large amount of information needs to be cut.Bneu2013 (talk)04:21, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The biggest issue is the article's length. It is currently 15,630 words, and therecommended length is no more than 10,000 words. In addition, there is some content that is missing citations, and information that needs to be updated.Bneu2013 (talk)04:03, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The length here is not inherently a problem; huge sweeping topics often permit larger articles. Having said that, this article passed GAN in 2008 at less than half its current length, meaning most of the text is unassessed. This is a good example of the need for GA sweeps -- there are more than a few articles in this position. It might require delisting, but could also just require a simple tune-up to see what of the added text is useful and polish it up. I've no sufficient grasp of the subject matter to lead such a job.Vami IV?Vaticidalprophet02:14, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't feel qualified to lead a reassessment either; however if this no longer meets GA, I don't think its far from it. I do agree that extensive topics such as this can exceed 10,000 words and still pass GA; some other users would disagree with me on this.Bneu2013 (talk)02:23, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The first line of the third paragraph of the Taxation section reads:"Texas is a "tax donor state"; in 2005, for every dollar Texans paid to the federal government in federal income taxes, the state got back about $0.94 in benefits." This line is both perplexing and its citation does not provide this information. Reference 260 redirects to a page which links to many posts but contains no information on the page itself. I propose this line should be removed if another reference cannot be found and–if another reference is found–the sentence should be clarified.Venusasaguy (talk)14:51, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Demographic Section Sentence Update Based On Newly Released Census Data
Thisedit request has been answered. Set the|answered= or|ans= parameter tono to reactivate your request.
Please change the last sentence of paragraph one of the demographic section from
Texas is the second-most populous state in the United States after California.
to
Texas is the second-most populous state in the United States after California and the only other U.S. state to surpass a total estimated population of 30 million people as of July 2, 2022.[1][2]Deepthinker73 (talk)06:42, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please also change the demographic chart on the right side of the page showing "est." 2021 population to the newly released 2022 estimated population of 30,029,572.
Thank you RealAspects, but I added one more thing to the request, that I guess didn't make it before the approval. Please see the last bit "Please also change the demographic chart on the right side of the page showing "est." 2021 population to the newly released 2022 estimated population of 30,029,572 which is a 3.03% increase over 2020." or do I need to submit a new Edit Request for that section/chart on the page?Deepthinker73 (talk)07:20, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Is mentioning abortionin state's articles actuallyWP: Undue? Heck, theTexas Heartbeat Act was partially responsible forDobbs. That seems to warrant mention to me. There's a lot of other things mentioned in the article with much less apparent importance.
Abortion is already extensively covered in the healthcare section. Add material there if you think it's needed, but reference in the lead will require a broader consensus. ~Pbritti (talk)23:47, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This edit byUser:Nikkimaria adds a length template to this article. I don't understand the justification for the edit, which Nikkimaria does not elaborate in edit history. In order to improve the article, I'm asking for some guidance about what specifically needs to be improved. A number of editors have put effort into reducing unnecessary or lengthy information. However, reading the article now, many statements are not excessively long. Therefore, I'm at a loss as to why the length template would apply here, or what would need to be changed to justify removing it. Clarification would be appreciated, and absent any clarification I willWP:BEBOLD and remove it.Cleter (talk)04:37, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Which details and subarticles are we talking about here? Many editors have taken action to improve Texas's length, with your length template being present for approximately 7 months. If there are any specific sections that need shortening, please include that. Thank you.Cleter (talk)04:46, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I look forward to this matter and see to it that it is resolved. I would appreciate it if other editors would focus their attention on this as well, so that the template may be removed and all may be well.Cleter (talk)04:59, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't read that thoroughly, you want the entire article to be shortened except for criminal law? You are being broad, please be specific.Cleter (talk)05:02, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
According to a study by the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank [1][2], Texas ranks last in personal freedom among the states. The study assesses various factors contributing to personal freedom, including incarceration rates, cannabis laws, civil asset forfeiture policies, educational freedom, gambling laws, marriage freedom, and travel freedom.
Despite Texas's sixth-place ranking in overall economic freedom, its last-place ranking in personal freedom highlights a potential disparity in the state's approach to economic and personal liberties [1][2]. This disparity has sparked discussions among Texas leaders and policymakers, with some expressing skepticism about the study's findings and others acknowledging the need for further examination of the state's policies in relation to personal freedom.
The study's assessment of Texas's personal freedom ranking provides valuable insights into the state's policies and their impact on individual liberties [1][2]. The contrast between Texas's ranking in personal freedom and its overall economic freedom underscores the complexity of balancing economic and personal liberties in the state.Cleter (talk)23:30, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the state of Texas does not need a section dedicated to corporal punishment [as opposed to]User:Carlstak. While corporal punishment might be important for Texas's legal system or educational policies, it does not appear to be a defining characteristic or a major focus of the state. The article already covers various aspects of Texas, including its history, geography, economy, culture, and politics. These are broader topics that provide a comprehensive overview of the state, and adding a specific section on corporal punishment may not be necessary for understanding Texas as a whole. ThanksCleter (talk)14:14, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The current write up (it does not have it's own section like you say, just one paragraph), is 57 words, and seemsWP:DUE in the summary of education, due to it's unusual prevalence and acceptance. I have added some additional sources to back up it's inclusion as necessary.Cerebral726(talk)14:28, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If that's the case, I suppose it would be necessary in education. Thank you for including sources, this talk may now come to a conclusion.Cleter (talk)14:34, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The backbone of this sentence is: "The name Texas … was applied … by the Spanish to the Caddo themselves …", with four qualifying phrases inserted at three points. Rather tedious to follow and might be broken into two sentences: one saying that it is Caddo, and another saying how the Spanish used it.2601:642:4600:BE10:A943:306E:D4C8:85A4 (talk)17:22, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should highlight somehow, that Texan city doesn’t have a 4 seasons Humid subtropical climate likeAtlanta orCharlotte but has a very short winter, And most days throughout February and March has a daytime temperature above 22.
Tell me how it's ungrammatical. Just about every Wikipedia page about a u.s. state is written like how I did my edit. Example on the page about California: "California is a state in the Western United States". Why shouldn't the first sentence on this page say "Texas is a state in the South Central region of the United States". And if it's repetitive because I mentioned South Central region two times, we can shorten it the second time by just saying "the most populous state in the region" for short instead of "the most populous state in the South Central region". And the part where I said Texas was an independent country instead of independent Republic, both are true so I don't see how that part is ungrammaticalHumansRightsIsCool (talk)02:05, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"When Europeans arrived in the Texas region, the language families present in the state were Caddoan, Atakapan, Athabaskan, Coahuiltecan, and Uto-Aztecan, [...]"
Atakapan and Coahuiltecan are given as Wikipedia links.
The other language families mentioned (Caddoan, Athabaskan, Uto-Aztecan) all have Wikipedia pages, and should be given as links too.Salmon9 (talk)20:41, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-4 vital article is ratedB-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale.
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a"change X to Y" format and provide areliable source if appropriate. —Sirdog(talk)16:45, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not done:LizardJr8 (talk)03:46, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
