Talk:Missouri/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

State name

I've lived in Missouri all my 34 years, and I'm a big fan of canoeing, but I've never heard that the name means "canoe". Anyone have a reference for that?

This is what the World Almanac and Book of Facts relates, and its what the official Missouri Tourism website relates, however it's not certain. The state was named for the river, which was named for the tribe, which received its name from the Algonquin Indians. Supposedly, "Missouri" means "people of the big canoes", not just "canoe". HOWEVER, I always heard, and found in other sources, that "Missouri" means "muddy waters" and came from another Indian group. Missouri Tourism says there is a mixup with what the name the Missouri Indians called the river means "muddy waters", but I'm not convinced. Like you, I've lived in Missouri all my life; but I've heard both, and that the exact origin was uncertain. Personally, I think the origin of "canoe" should be removed, at least for the time being. Rt66lt 03:05, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

According to "Names on the Land" (Stewart), a standard of placename origins, the Missouri River acquired its name in the aftermath of Jolliet and Marquette's 1673 voyage from Green Bay to Arkansas, down the Mississippi. He writes, "...they came in a few days to a wide river pouring in from the northwest, very muddy and swift. From some Indians they learned its name as Pekitanoui, or "muddy". On their maps, Jolliet and Marquette put down the name of various tribes living along its course, as they must have learned them from Indians near the mouth. Among these tribes were the Ouchage and the Messouri. Afterwards the French called that river by the name of the first of these tribes, changing it to Osage. But finally that became the name of a smaller river, and the greater one became Missouri. As to its meaning, "miss" may mean "big". But whether the whole name means "big muddy", or "big canoes" or something else, is a matter of doubt." Elsewhere he points out that the names given to Indian tribes by other Indians were often of ancient origin and uncertain meaning even to the Indians. It could be that the Indians who told the French about the Messouri tribe did not know the term meant anything other than the name of a tribe. Pfly 06:32, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Requested Image

I'd like to see a simple picture of a Missouri license plate showing the "Show Me" slogan. I found one on the net; but I'd prefer for some Wikipedian to spend 10 minutes with a digital camera and get one that's free and clear to post into the public domain. (We could argue that a cropped portion of File:Showme.jpg would be fair use, but I'd prefer to just having one that no one can argue about).JimD 20:20, 2004 Aug 17 (UTC) (from California's Silicon Valley).

convert to use template:US state and drop English measurements?

I've recently changed Template:US state to make the table more compact and have converted all state articles except Missouri's to use the template. Including the English measurements in addition to metric makes the table entries look awkward in the current version of the template. Kansas is the only other state article that includes English measurements. Anyone care if I convert Missouri to use the template and delete the English measurements? An alterative might be to create a different version of the template that accommodates both English and metric (which I'd be willing to do if anyone strongly cares about preserving the English measurements). -- Rick Block 15:52, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The US still uses the English system, most of our data sources on US topics use the English system as a result, and many US readers think in terms of the English system. AFAIC, as long as this is the case, we should have both systems referenced in our articles and templates. - jredmond 17:10, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Missouri: A Southern State?

The link to the Southern region article says that Missouri may or may not be considered as a Southern state depending on the source. However, I know for a fact that many Missourians do not consider themselves as such (I myself am one).

Missouri's article should be rewritten to reflect this. It may be considered as a Midwestern State or a Southern state depending on the source, but this dichotomy shows that it cannot purely be classified as the article does now.

Another point, Missouri lays above the Mason-Dixon line.--Doyel 20:34 (UTC) 26 Sept 2005

I'm a native Missourian, and have read a bit about its history. Certainly before the American Civil War, Missouri was considered Southern, however, it was sharply divided during that war, and had the highest casulty rate of any state. The Bootheel of the state in the far southeastern corner has a Southern culture. Saint Louis has a Northern or Eastern culture, and is too Catholic be called Southern; it is like New Orleans, which is another town with a culture that defies its geography. Kansas City has a Western culture, still being called a "cow town". The state lacks a rural African-American culture that tends to characterize the South. The farming areas of Missouri are quite like other Midwestern farming areas, while the wilderness areas of the Ozarks are culturally more like Appalachia. Missouri is usually called a 'Border State", which I think symbolizes its divided character. The regional accents are a good clue also; Saint Louis is distinctly midwestern, similar to Illinois and Ohio; the Ozarks have an Appalachian accent, while the Bootheel has more Southern accents. The Mason-Dixon line is not applicable here, in my opinion; you do see the Confederate flag quite often, but only rarely in public places, such as government buildings and outside of businesses, and then, only in certain areas of the state. -- Marcusscotus1 19:56, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

I'm going to change the article to reflect the discussion. -- Doyel 19:05, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

My two cents worth - I think I've seen the state moving toward "Southern" in the years since I left (1978). I lived in Saint Joseph, in the northwest part of the state. My memory says that Southern accents were rare then. They don't seem so rare now. Attitudes seem more Southern, too. On the other hand, this may speak more of my memory, or how I've changed, than of reality.

One interesting thing I've read is that some people consider that the 'typical' accent for the US is 'Midwest standard'. I've read that the best candidates for this are from the Columbia, Missouri area. The argument is that early radio and television people often came from the University of Missouri's journalism school and this defined how the US, on the average, speaks. Think Walter Cronkite, a Missouri native, with what I would consider a neutral accent.

When I saw the attribution that Missouri was a Southern state, it didn't sit completely right with me. The state is too complex for such a simple description. I'm glad that it was changed. Catbar (Brian Rock) 18:31, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

I'm from Missouri, born and raised. Missouri is not Southern; it's Midwestern. During the Civil War, the south end of Missouri was considered Confederate, but the northern part was Union. Parts of the Underground Railroad are in Kansas City. (See Kelly's in Westport) Missouri is completely surrounded by Midwestern states on three sides and the bottom border touches a few Southern states. The northern part houses the largest cities, so it should be defined as Midwestern.

Also, Kansas City isn't a Cowtown anymore. It's a communication hub. Kansas Citians move fast. Southern people I've taken there have compared it to Chicago. Kansas Citians also talk fast and don't have much of an accent.

I've never seen a Confederate flag in Missouri.

Also, the username that keeps changing the article to say Southern reflects that the user is from Kansas.

Hobbes747 03:34, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Missouri is one of those states that defy terms like Midwest, Southern, etc. In exploring much of it recently, the western parts sure seemed like Kansas to me, and the northern parts like Iowa. But the natives of Kansas and Iowa I know tend to dislike being lumped with Missouri. Old animosities run deep. Anyway, it is a perfect case for showing how sectional terms are not well-defined and depend on specific criteria. As an ex-slave state, Missouri falls more toward Kentucky than Illinois, the Upper South rather than the Midwest. As the first state established west of the Mississippi River, Missouri falls more toward the Great Plains states like Kansas. As the origin of the Oregon and California Trails, it is linked to Nebraska. But the Ozarks tie Missouri to Arkansas. And its position at the confluences of the Mississippi River with the Missouri and the Ohio link it everything! It is rather in a class of its own. Finally, "Southern" is a very broad term, and in the broad sense, I find Indiana to have a distinctly Southern feel, mixed with Midwestern. Definitions from the Census Bureau notwithstanding, human culture does not always change at state lines.. almost never, in fact.

Also, for what it's worth, I saw plenty of Confederate flags in Missouri. The old courthouse in the center of Carthage, for example, has stone memorials to the Battle of Carthage, Civil War, complete with stone-carved, painted, and clearly officially sanctioned depitctions of the Confederate flag. The state has a little bit of everything. It is both rejected from status as Midwestern and Southern and Western, yet fits all those terms. Pfly 06:32, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Sorry about the "cowtown" statement. I haven't been to KC in years; back in the 1970s the town almost felt like it was in Colorado (except for the mountains). A friend who made a grand tour of many county courthouses in Missouri states that the Rebel Flag can been seen in public places in counties in the western part of the state, not sure where, but it was an area where Jesse James made notorious bank robberies. Also, the Confederate flag can be found even in St. Louis, typically by recent transplants, in working-class neighborhoods and Jefferson County, Missouri. There is a Confederate memorial in Forest Park in St. Louis; a Union memorial is also nearby; a statue of northern General Ulyses S. Grant, a St. Louis resident, is in front of St. Louis City Hall. St. Louis is called "The Gateway to the West". I recall a Southern flavor in New Madrid County, Missouri several years ago, including a "Little Dixie" theater. There are good arguments that Missouri is a Southern state, and even the Confederate memorial at Stone Mountain, Georgia explicitly states this; Southern Partisans will certainly claim Missouri as one of their own. I recall statements by the actor Tony Randall in an interview, and politician Jack Kemp in a speech refer to St. Louis as being in the "South". But, there were too many European and eastern immigrants to make Succession a majority popular opinion in 1861 and at least in Saint Louis we generally think of the state now as being Midwestern, and this seems to be the opinion in cities I've visited in the eastern, northern, and central parts of the state. The fact that there is sharp argment about the North/South orientation of state tells us immediately that its status is not clear. Let's stick with Border State. -- Marcusscotus1 17:42, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

No offense taken about Cowntown. Good points, btw. I would concur with Missouri being called a Border State.

The United_States_Census_Bureau defines Missouri as Midwestern. Check their page for verification. CNN defines it as Midwestern as well.

I'm totally shocked to learn that there are official Confederate flags in Missouri.

St. Louis is called the Gateway to the West because it was where the first parties left on the trails to the West. However, Kansas City and areas immediately surrounding Kansas City ( Independence, Missouri ) became the official starting points for the Santa Fe Trail, the Oregon Trail and the California Trail.

The same person has edited the page to say Southern again.

--Hobbes747 02:35, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Missouri is mid-western. Not southern; and why not eliminate that antiquated border term as it is rather meaningless after a century and a half isn't it (it isn't on the Mexican or Canadian border). The only Rebel flags I see here in the Ozarks (about 30 mi. from Arkansas) are those flaunted by good-ol' boys emulating the Dukes of Hazzard never in any official public spot (unless some local official is one of them good ol' boys :-). Vsmith 02:54, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Missouri was a slave state, that's why I consider it a Southern State. That's why I changed it to that, I never knew that it would cause so much controversy. I won't add "Southern" to it again, but Missouri is certainly not a Mid-Western state. I think it should be left as is. It really depends, people who say "Missourah" which is a lot of people from Missouri are Southern. People who say Missouri correctly are not. Burroughsks88 24:58, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Slave state?? Are we still hung up on ancient history? Border state is likewise a century and a half out of date. The Census bureau defines it as midwestern and it is situated between IL & KS two other midwestern states - what is the problem? As for the pronunciation - those of us native to the southern Ozarks pronounce it correctly :-), while those affectatious northern Missourians put the "ah" on the end - leastwise that's been my perspective. Have not done any research on the history of pronunciation, might be an interesting bit of trivia :-). Vsmith 13:54, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

I think MO. is a Southern State. I know geogrphically its more central states, but geography doesnt always indicate culture. You can get chicken n' dumplings in Kansas City- thats as far north as you can get it, and Kansas City is BELOW the Mason-Dixon line. Mo is a "border" state IMO, too, because its right on that dividing line between midwest and south, in culture. Southern MO is very southern. Northern MO. might be a hybrid of Midwestern/Southern. Has anyone seen the comedy show "Mama's Family"- thats good indication of this. Many "Midwestern States" have what are called "Little Dixies". And Mo had many Confederate regiments during the War Between The Statse. So, I think Missouri is Midwestern-Southern.

Mama's Family is a fictional comedy. Californians' perceptions of Missouri don't define it and Carol Burnett, the creator of Mama's Family is from Texas.

From the Mason-Dixon Line article, "Debate respectfully proceeds as to whether Missouri and Oklahoma belong on the north or south side of the line. On the one hand, Missouri was a slave state; on the other hand, it's classified as part of the Midwest, not the south and remained in the Union during the Civil War."

Also, you can get Chicken and Dumplings at Cracker Barrel all over the country. - Hobbes747 00:08, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Here's a list of famous Missourians I had lying around from an article I wrote awhile back for a newsletter: Maya Angelou, Burt Bacharach, Josephine Baker, Yogi Berra, Omar Bradley, George Washington Carver, Walter Cronkite, Sheryl Crow, T. S. Elliott, Robert Heinlein, Edwin Hubbell, Emmett Kelly, Kenneth Lay, Rush Limbaugh, John Pershing, Vincent Price, Harry Truman, and Dick Van Dyke.

It doesn't prove anything, other than I sure don't see a strong Southern character there - but there is some. For what it's worth... Catbar (Brian Rock) 01:00, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

I would argue very strongly against Missouri being a southern state, but then again, I'm from St. Louis. Most of us find the idea of being a southern state simply ridiculous. True, we were a "slave state," but if you look at the numbers, even Maryland had more slaves than us, so by holding slaves, that doesn't indicate south. And we voted against secession over 100 years ago, choosing to remain in the Union during the Civil War. So the historical facts are against Missouri being in the south. -- phil4876

Agreed. I've lived here my entire life, and been around the state and have *never* heard of it referred to as anything but "midwestern" in location. The Deviant 14:03, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

I've spent about half of my life living in Missouri and have always considered it partially Southern and partially Midwestern, depending on the source. I think the only objective thing to do is to reflect this in the Wikipedia article, which after all is solely meant to provide uncontested information - or make it clear when it is contested - and therefore where there is not a near-unanimous consensus on something (sufficient to make it a "fact") this should be stated.

Since it seems that the midwestern side is currently dominant in this discussion, I am not going to defend why Missouri could be called midwestern (I personally don't see any sense in defining it as "purely southern" either).

Historic reasons why Missouri is not fully Midwestern:

Not only was it a slave state, but it had considerable Confederate sympathies (which is why it experienced a violent guerrilla conflict during the war). The only part of the state that was generally considered "Northern" (or midwestern) at the time was the area north of the river, populated by immigrant farmers, as well as the border city of St. Louis, which was strongly pro-Union like all border cities. I think it is a gross error to just pretend that this part of Missouri state history, in which a large segment of its population was willing to fight and die to secede from the Union (the strongest possible declaration of Southernnness), should simply be ignored just because a majority of Missourans today don't consider themselves 'Southern'.

Contemporary reasons why Missouri is not fully Midwestern:

Climate (have you ever heard of the "kudzu grass" definition? There is a type of grass that grows only in the Southern climates - it grows in Southern Missouri, but not in Kansas City or St. Louis, and also in Northern Florida but not in Southern Florida, in Eastern Texas but not in Western Texas, etc.)

Culture (Missouri has a strong undercurrent of Southern-style religiosity, more similar in this respect to the South than to the Midwest, and also has more executions than any midwestern state)

It is also considered Southern by many people in the U.S. today, and ultimately it is popular opinion that defines these sort of things (or leaves then undefined by default, which I think is the case here).

Nonetheless, I don't care enough about this issue to start an editing war so I will leave to whoever oversees this article to consider the merit of my arguments. I think the best thing for Wikipedia's neutrality would be to avoid putting Missouri firmly in either the "southern" or "midwestern" camps. -- 193.54.67.92

The best description I've seen holds that Missouri is the southernmost northern state, the northernmost southern state, the westernmost eastern state, and the easternmost western state. (I've also seen that applied specifically to the city of St. Louis.) As discussed in the various entries above, it has aspects of all of these, varying by region. Like many others who have written here, I am a life-long Missourian who does not consider Missouri a Southern state, though some of those southern regions sure are. But we may be unable to view it from the perspective of someone from |Buffalo or Boise – a similar phenomenon, perhaps, to the fact that no one can hear themselves speaking with an accent. -- Kbh3rd 18:21, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

I grew up near Higginsville where there is a Confederate Cemetary. A Confederate flag does fly there but I've never seen it anywhere else except in the back windows of pickup trucks.

To confuse things further over whether Missouri is a southern state: MO is part of the Southern Governor's Association. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Governors%27_Association --140.254.1.197 19:27, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

It's also in the Midwestern Governor's Association [1] TMS63112 17:06, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Not only is Missouri part of the Southern Governor's Association, there is a clear line where Southern Baptists cease to be a large part of state populations, and Missouri is to the south of this line (whose northern border is Oklahoma, Missouri, Kentucky and Virginia). It is also one of the states that has a high number of executions and widespread corporal punishment in schools, two more clear dividers between Southern and Northern/Midwestern cultural influence. It was a slave state and during the Civil War was certainly no more Unionist than neighboring Kentucky, which is clearly a southern state. Apart from the fact that Missourans consider themselves midwestern, there is no cultural evidence to suggest that the state is a part of the midwest. When you're on the highway heading from Illinois into Missouri you immediately notice the sudden influx of Christian Fundamentalist billboards when you cross the state line - and there is no such clear distinction when crossing from Southern Missouri into Arkansas. The most famous Missouran is Mark Twain (who dares call him a Yankee?), and St. Louis is the northernmost major city clearly marked by 'Mississippi River culture.' Clearly the article should state at the very least that Missouri is "either southern or midwestern," but as usual 'tis the stubborn who prevail.

I live in St. Louis and have always heard "St. Louis is a northern city in a southern state." If it hadn't been for the strong anti-slavery German population in St. Louis marching on Jeff City, Missouri would have been part of the Confedercy. I lived for four years in out-state MO near the Iowa border and the people from there definately related to Southern attitudes compared to St. Louis. I would even say it more Southern feeling than Florida where I grew up (and not in the tourist area, I mean the cracker areas). Out-state Mo is very different from STL and KC, and I think alots of the people there consider themselves Southerners. They are certainly nothing like people in Illinios in attitude and opinion. I think that is one example where populations follow Census border lines, although I imagine a river like the Mississippi certainly helped --Birgitte§β ʈ Talk 15:00, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I think "border state" defines Missouri as well as it can be - there are Southern people througout the state during the civil war - the Northern half was considred "northern" because it was occupied by Federal troops and those Missouri forces that joined the confederate army weren't sent northward. In point of fact the majority of people who migrated to Missouri prior to the Civil War were from Kentucky and Tenessee, and were not "Northern" in attitude. If you study the war, you'll see the bulk of violence by Partisan forces - Missouri Geurillas and Kansas Redlegs - happened in the northern half of the State. The fact of the matter is that most of the people north of the the river didn't own slaves and werne't particularly concerned with that issue, but didn't care for Federal troops moving in and lording it over them - and when Unionists began abusing folks, siezing property and wrongfully imprisoning them under the aegis of supressing "southern sympathizers", and Kansas Redlegs came across the border raping, burning, and pillaging - well, they found thier side had been chosen for them. Just to highlight this, as I understand it some of my ancestors were part of the Underground Railroad - and some of those same ancestores rode with the Partisan Rangers.

There is still a deep connection to all of this in alot of places - I live one county south of the Iowa border, and not one hour drive from me is a town who's historical landmarks and major festival are dedicated to General Sterling Price - a local who was a CONFEDERATE Cavalry commander. Though to be fair, after the war he continued his military service with the US Government and later was a successfull politician. However, the statues and liknesses of him always show him in a Confederate uniform, and the Stars and Bars (which by the way is NOT "the Confederate flag") flies high.

    My first edit.

The Bootheel is clearly "Southern". I'm from Charleston, Missouri. I live in Savannah, Georgia and people are always surprised I'm not from Alabama or some other southern state. Furthermore, the atmosphere and culture below Crowley's Ridge is supportive of this view.

Please leave the idea open ended. -Rabb Whitehead

I grew up in California and now find myself in St. Louis. This place is the most racist place I've ever lived or travelled to when it comes to Asian-Americans. Thus, I vote it as a Southern State. Kenzilla

Exactly what do racism against Asian-Americans and the South have to do with each other? Peyna 00:39, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Missouri's most unique character is that it is a Midwest border state that is split not only North and South but also East and West. The collision of the cultures has defined the state. For those who forget about the long view, Missouri was a slave state and a star of it was represented on the Confederate flag. Missouri's two governors at the beginning of the Civil War (the first being pro-North and second being pro-South) declared that Missouri would be neutral in the war not siding with either side. Vive le Midwest border state! Americasroof 02:16, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I've done a bit of study on the U.S. South, and I would say Missouri has moved away from being considered "southern." My professor ended up designating as southern the former states of the Confederacy, while recognizing that debate is inevitable. I'm not sure the Mason-Dixon line truly applies, because Florida isn't really seen as a southern state (the South has as much to do with culture as it does geography). Missouri has an interesting Civil War history, it was a slave state, and remember that Mark Twain said Huck Finn was from a Southern town, but I would go with the federal designation as a Midwestern state. Americasroof point on collision of cultures is quite relevant: much of the northern section is a lot like the upper midwest, the northwest has the Great Plains feel of Kansas and Nebraska, the southwest is much like OK and TX approaching the American Southwest, the southeast has cotton fields and a Southern culture, and our east and west borders are dominated by major cities. I've heard the argument that Missouri is somewhat of a microcosm of our nation as a whole. Just a thought.

Pronunciation

Could someone add an IPA pronunciation note? Most of the approximations ("rhymes with ...") I have found online don't really help. Rueckk 14:06, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Oh my. I tried using the IPA chart for English. Can anyone confirm if this would be right?

Some pronounce it as mɪsˌsɚɹi

Others pronounce it as mɪsˌsɚɹə

Both are accepted.

- Hobbes747 06:29, 24 October 2005 (UTC)\

It may or may not be worth noting that the former pronuctiacation is used in St. Louis and the latter in out-state MO. I am not sucre out Kansas Citty. It is a distinct enough difference that in close goveners race canidates have record commmericial with both pornuciations to air seperately in each appropiate place. I remember Claire McCaskill also making the effort to alternate the pronuctiation within a single speech. --Birgitte§β ʈ Talk 14:40, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

• In my experence: St Louis [metro], Jeff City [city limits], Kansas City [city limits]: MissourE
• Columbia : MissourUH

Actually, Kerry having two slightly different radio ads with the different pronoucations based on the MissourE vs MissourUH poll was looked upon as worst of all. (Indecisive or worst yet "too cleaver for own good") Joncnunn 21:33, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

We've had some comments above on the "proper" pronunciation of Missouri. The following is an extract from an article I wrote about a year ago for a local (NE Ohio) Mensa newsletter. You can find it at Brain Candy #87 - Considering the English Language. It isn't necessarily ready for prime time, so I wouldn't put it in the main article, but here it is if you're curious.

"The simplest variations of the English language are regional dialects. Something struck me in the second Presidential debate last week. The debate was held in St. Louis, and both candidates mentioned Missouri several times. At one point, President Bush pronounced the state's name "mi ZOOR uh". This is a frequent variant of the more common pronunciation of "mi ZOOR ee". Now, it probably doesn't matter too much to most Americans, but Missourians notice. I remember an old article I read years ago that suggested that the "uh" pronunciation was common in the northwestern part of Missouri (where I grew up, by the way), while the rest of the universe pronounced it with the "ee" pronunciation. That may have been true at one time, but time changes things and we now have a Texan using what was once thought to be a local pronunciation. I looked around the web and found that some think it's a west/east issue and others point to a rural/urban variation. Another thing to think about: was that pronunciation used intentionally for effect? If, for instance, you want to appeal to rural voters, and there is a rural/urban component to the pronunciation, you would use the rural variant. It isn't uncommon to hear politicians adopt a bit of a Southern drawl when they are speaking in the South, or for a slight drawl in a candidate to become more pronounced."

I personally respond favorably to the "uh" pronunciation. The "ee" pronunciation always reminded me of "Sooeeee!" - not a favorable impression. Catbar (Brian Rock) 00:50, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

It's Missoureee.. Do you say Mississippaaah?

I agree that it is Missoureee but the logic used just above is faulty- (ex. Kansas, Arkansas) Lrldcs

...and the pronunciation of many of the town names within Missouri as well in comparison to the country or state names that are spelled the same.

I've added four alternate pronunciations for Missouri to the article. Take your pick. Angr/talk 13:06, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

To many people in southwest Missouri, "Misouree" is proper, "Misouruh" is slang.

Why does the current IPA have the first vowel as an "uh"(ə) sound, when from reading here and from my own pronunciation of the word, the first vowel is almost always an "ih"(ɪ) sound? Peyna 01:49, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Official language?

This article and Languages in the United States list English as the "official" language of the state. The only mention of English in the Missouri Constitution is in Article I of the Bill of Rights, Section 22(a):

(1968) There are no educational requirements, other than the ability to read, write, speak, and understand the English language, for jury service, and it is no ground for disqualification of veniremen that at the outset they are unfamiliar with or do not know the meaning of technical legal terms. Parker v. Wallace (Mo.), 431 S.W.2d 136.[2]

That does not sound like grounds to declare it the "official" language. I.e., no proviso that all laws, official communications, etc., must be in the language. It's the de facto standard language of the state, but official? Unless this search engine is missing something. -- Kbh3rd 15:30, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

A little more digging found Senate bill 583 of the 89th General Assembly that "recognizes English as the most common language used in the state and recognizes the necessity of fluency for integration into American culture." It was passed by the legislature and signed by the governor in 1998. The bill provides for English language assistance and education for non-speakers, but only prescribes the use of the language in wills and estates "to ensure the accurate execution of such documents", providing for translation when necessary. It seems very much weaker than Senate Bill 645 of the 89th General Assembly that specifically tried to declare, "The English language is the official language of the state of Missouri." That one was apparently combined with SB 583 resulting in a much weaker piece of legislation that does not use the term "official language".

As there is nothing in the constitution, and given that apparently the legislature deliberately did not declare an "official language" after having considered it, is it accurate to present English here as the official language of Missouri? -- Kbh3rd 08:47, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Not sure if I'm in a time warp here, but as the entry was still there, I edited it to make it unofficial. -- nae'blis _(talk) 22:40, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Image:Wiki missouri.jpg

I have removed this from the article because it does not fulfill the requirement of use "for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research" as required by American law. If you intend to discuss the tourism industry in Missouri or otherwise discuss something with specific reference to the postage stamp, please add the image back in. Johnleemk | Talk 17:05, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Battleship

I don't know how to edit or add disambiguation pages, but might I suggest that a link to the Wikipedia article on the American battleship "USS Missouri" be added to the Missouri page? [unknown user]

Good idea, I second that motion. Joncnunn 21:36, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

State Holidays

Perhaps there should be a state holiday section, since Missouri has a few holidays not on the US Federal List, including Truman Day. This is the state employee list.

• New Years Day
• MLK Day
• Lincoln's Birthday
• Washington's Birthday aka President's Day
• Truman Day (Monday, May 8th in 2006)
• Memorial Day
• Independence Day (aka 4th of July)
• Labor Day
• Columbus Day
• Vetrans Day
• Thanksgiving Day
• In 2005, day after Thankgiving by Governor's Degree; so far no word on 2006
• Christmas Day

Joncnunn 16:04, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah... --Pupster21 15:15, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Important Cities

I must say, we are taking some liberties with what we're listing as "important cities." I'm sorry, but Eldon and Lebanon do not qualify. Ste. Genevieve is a stretch, and Osage Beach is just a resort town on the lake. Aluminum boats, the Miller County derby? I'm born and raised in Missouri and none of that means anything to me. We can't put every county seat on there; after all, we have the most counties of any state!

I agree, Eldon and Lebanon aren't "important" enough to make the list. If Osage Beach is on the list (and possibly if it isn't), Branson should be. It's far more important a tourist town. Kamoranakrre T. Eyaelitenan 03:20, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I could go with Lebanon as a manufacturing center but won't push it. "Notable" might be a more fitting section heading than "important". BTW, four other states have more counties than Missouri. (We Wikipedians are supposed to be sticklers for the facts.) --Kbh3^rdtalk 14:06, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree, rename this section in a more netural term such as "notable cities" or "cites of interest". (Everyone's home town is important to them). And definately add Branson. We actually could list every county seat, but then the images with their locations would have to be removed. Jon 19:13, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Important cities is a embarrasing meaningless category that invites all sorts of trouble. It's so overdone with the graphics as to overpower and trivialize the whole article. Follow the model Illinois. Have a brief paragraph on the biggest cities and send folks on their merry way to List of cities in Missouri and List of towns and villages in Missouri. You could also add List of metropolitan areas in Missouri. This subheading really does have to be drastically reduced or nuked altogether! Americasroof 02:01, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Whoops, I made the comment on having the most counties. I don't know where I heard that, but I really should have checked it before I posted. Now I'm blushing.

Questional importance

"Missouri has a very notable urban-rural split, as Democrat John Kerry only won four of the state's 115 counties—St Louis City, St Louis County, Ste Genevieve, and Jackson County." In the 2004 cycle, (and for 2000 and to a somewhat lessor extent in 1996) having a notable urban-rural split was the norm in US states, so I'm not sure that it's important enough to list here. It's actually more interesting in 2004 that many rural New England counties were blue and a few big cities in the great plains were red. Jon 19:21, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Official language

While it was an anon IP edit, I thought I would address the issue. There is currently no "official" language in Missouri. The closest thing you have is a statute "recognizing" English as the "common language" of the State, but that's really just a policy statement and nothing more. M.S. 1.028. Peyna 01:07, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

1990 Census Data

I don't think it is necessary to have a census column from 1990 adjoining the 2000 one. As you can see from the data, the numbers really didn't change that much between the two years. Funnyhat 22:55, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Done. How does it look? Peyna 23:50, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Major Cities

I think some of these are really questionable. Granted, I am from St. Louis originally, but I really don't see Lebanon as major city for the state; the justification for this one even seems iffy. Other opinions on this?

Another odd inclusion here is Eldon; I do not think that this is an very important city in terms of the state, no offense going to the fine citizens of Eldon. However, I've been to Eldon a few times, and I still do not know what the Miller County Derby is. I have a hard time imagining many people from outside the state giving this much consideration, but I could be wrong. The fact that it is larger than Osage Beach isn't really that important either.

Again, I'm not trying to start a war about which cities are important or not; all of our cities are important ones. As such I think this section such maybe be renamed "Major cities." "Important cities" is in a loaded phrase, begging to have people roused about how important their own community is.

Comments please. --Doyel 14:59, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Note the discussion above on "Important Cities." I think the idea about Illinois's system is worth checking out.

Missouri Bellweather

The Missouri Bellweather is the single most interesting facet of contemporary Missouri politics. To pick most of the elections in 100 years might be conicidence. But to pick every one except one is something quite unique. To reduce this to just the results of the last election is a shame. Do a googe on "Missouri Bellweather"

http://www.google.com/search?q=MISSOURI+BELLWETHER

Americasroof 02:30, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Unless you can provide some references giving us something more than a mere correlation, it doesn't belong in the article. Additionally, a "bellwether" is an indicator of something or a leader in a particular area. Missouri's choice of politics does not influence the rest of the country, and aside from voting for whoever won the presidency in 24 out of the last 25 elections doesn't mean much either. Especially when you consider the drastic changes in the makeup of the country and its citizens throughout that time. I would argue it doesn't even qualify as a bellwether. Peyna 02:43, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Do the google

http://www.google.com/search?q=MISSOURI+BELLWETHER

Americasroof 02:53, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

What's your point? I see a bunch of articles written by politicans in Missouri puffing up its importance and I see another bunch of articles that do nothing more that state the same correlation you have. If you can provide some evidence that Missouri actually plays a leading role in the direction that politics in the country take OR it is an indicator of the political climate of the country, which doesn't seem the case, arguably a state like Ohio is doing a better job of that since it has been so close in elections lately and so hotly contested, much like a snapshot of the rest of the country. Peyna 12:20, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

First Interstates

The whole point of an encyclopedia article is to point out things that are unique. There have been numerous articles and broadcast stories about I-70 and I-44 being the first as the system celebrates its 50th year. Peyna has been vetoing my edits on interstates and bellweather and the justifications have always been POV. I on the other hand have cited sources (a big Wikipedia plus). Here's a source for the Missouri first interstates. [3]. I'm really not up to continue fighting over this article. It's a shame because there's a lot of cool unique things about Missouri that make interesting reading. Americasroof 03:14, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

The Missouri thing re: interstates is interesting, but if you're going to include it, it should be qualified to state that other states make the exact same claim and give the different claims. Since this is already done at the article Interstate Highway System, do we need to repeat the information? But, just providing "Missouri claims to have built the first Interstate" is POV. Feel free to write an NPOV version. Peyna 12:23, 28 July 2006 (UTC)