![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Are you sure that the name is Spanish and not Latin?
I removed the "from Latin" part because it was confusing and not needed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Funguymon ( talk • contribs) 23:59, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
It needs to be changed from Latin to Spanish because mountain in Spanish is montana where the Latin translation that I looked up is mons montis. I remember my 8th grade history teacher tell us that a specific senator (can't remember who) asked for it to be Montana because he thought the name was beautiful, and I believe he tried to apply it to other states as well. I do not have a source on this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.145.229.74 ( talk) 01:57, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Other Spanish-named states retain their original names in Spanish (see Tejas, Nuevo México) in spite of English adaptations. -- Error 01:43, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Yes, it's Spanish. Or else the State Government is wrong, because that's what they say too. Montanabw 22:19, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Does the above have a source? I couldn't find it on Montana's state website, but I did find this: "Created out of the Idaho Territory in 1864, the name Montana is a derivation of the Latin word "montaanus" which means mountainous." Shearer, Benjamin F. and Barbara S. State Names, Seals, Flags and Symbols Greenwood Press, Westport, Connecticut - 1994 ISBN 978-0313315343 Bdusel ( talk) 00:30, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
"... and on the west and southwest is the Idaho border, marked by the Bitterroot River."
The Bitterroot River marks no such boundary, although the crest of the Bitterroot Range does mark a portion of the above referenced border.
"Montana is the only state in the union that have rivers that flow into three different oceans: The Pacific Ocean, the Gulf of Mexico, and Hudson Bay." I'm curious how these are three oceans. If Montana's rivers run into these three bodies of water, then I would say the water ultimately flows into the Pacific and the Atlantic, as both the Hudson Bay (via the Labrador Sea) and the Gulf of Mexico eventually flow into the Atlantic Ocean.
I think its safe to go back to three oceans and it sounds cool.
The hudson bay is part of the Artic Ocean, the gulf of mexico, the Atlantic Ocean, and The Pacific Ocean.
You should have left is as "only state in the union". The page now says "Montana is the only geographic area in the world whose rivers form parts of three major watersheds (i.e. where two continental divides intersect): The Pacific Ocean, the Gulf of Mexico, and Hudson Bay which are divided atop Triple Divide Peak in Glacier National Park." This is not really at all true. Off the top of my head, Canada has four: Hudson Bay, Arctic Ocean, Pacific Ocean, Atlantic Ocean. Even if we're talking about subnational entities, the Canadian provinces of Saskatchewan and Alberta both also contain three watersheds: Gulf of Mexico, Hudson Bay, and Arctic Ocean. I don't know what to change the satement to, but what it says now isn't accurate. AntidoteWasHad ( talk) 23:08, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
What makes Three Forks any more of a "historical" town than, say, Deer Lodge or Anaconda or Red Lodge? Why add this distinction, especially when the only historical reference on the Three Forks page is a very short paragraph about Sacajawea? I think the header and table should be removed and Three Forks folded in with the list above it. Comments? Gary D Robson 13:51, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I think it would be better to have ghost towns as a category since there are so many that are around the state. Also, many of them are considered Historical Landmarks. Mt.holliday ( talk) —Preceding comment was added at 03:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps 'geologically important' would be a better heading. Seeing as that's where the Missouri river formed. Brain sage ( talk) 23:40, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
A user insists on changing "vast Great Plains" to "endless Great Plains." I am not sure what is wrong with the word "vast" to describe the Great Plains; they are indeed vast. They are not, however, "endless," neither literally nor metaphorically. I have no idea why this user believes it is more neutral, NPOV and accurate to describe the Great Plains as endless instead of vast. But I am going to take this to the highest levels of Wikipedia arbitration if he continues to revert. Moncrief 16:30, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
Does anybody see any crying need to edit Saguna Brahman, Corpus Christi Hooks, and even the fictional Azeroth (world) and Ages of Myst III: Exile for a similar reason? Or, quite relevant to Moncrief's arguments, how about Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, with its talk about "endless 'edit wars'"? The burden on justifying a change should lie with the proponent of the change. Gene Nygaard 03:52, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
Gene, this is irrational. "Vast" is close enough to "endless" and it's literally correct, too. Ashibaka ( tock) 05:12, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
Definately Vast. Astrokey44 11:27, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
I support Moncrief's "vast". While I understand that votes are viewed with disdain on Wikipedia [so please don't quote "Wikipedia is not a democracy" at me), I'd say all else fails, put it to a vote. I believe a consensus, or near-consensus will emerge, and we can move on. MCB 21:14, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
I also support "vast." There's no contest, really. "Endless" and "seemingly endless" are both suboptimal, at best. You might just as well refer to the plains as being "infinite." They are, of course, not. They are vast. IronDuke 05:27, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
Seems like a petty argument, but I guess it's important to someone. The plains of Montana end at the border of that state. If you're in Sidney & head east about 10 miles, you'll be in North Dakota. I doubt if the good people there would appreciate you calling THEIR part of the Great Plains, "the Montana Plains", because that part ended at the border. "Vast" is a much more accurate term for an encyclopedia, however, "seemingly endless", as already suggested, should satisfy anyone. Just my 2 cents. MercForHire 04:00, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
The conflict seems to be resolved as "vast" has not been reverted for many days. Thank you everyone for your comments.
Moncrief
05:39, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
wow, you guys. just wow.
67.172.61.222
21:37, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
I don't want to be the kill-joy, and I'm not, since I'm not enjoying the waste of space. Grow up, and if you want to argue about what defines a dictionary, or whether or not 'endless' is an acceptable term, go to BlogSpot, or somewhere else where they don't care. And either way, I wouldn't call Montana '90% plains'. It's NOT that much. Of course, I spent all my life in the Helena Valley, so maybe I'll speak for myself. How about we just leave it at 'the Great Plains' instead of elaborating?
Brain sage (
talk)
23:46, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
"Oro y plata"
Why is Montana's State Motto Spanish? There must be, what, all of 3 Spanish speakers in the state? :D
The end of the introductory portion of this article says:
"The largest city is Billings with an area of around 144,417.
What's that number supposed to represent (and why is it bold?) Dxco 06:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
I was just wondering why the race section was lowered to three races instead of the earlier version: 89.5% White 6.2% Native American 2.0% Hispanic 0.5% Asian 0.3% Black 1.7% Mixed race. I think unless there is some really good reason (i.e. new census data) these stats should be reverted.-- Tainter 23:35, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm, no hispanic population exists in Montana? Amazing, someone took that out.-- Hellogoodsir 20:33, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Someone needed to fix it anyways. It adds up to 100.2%, and it has to be out of 100% Simple error, but a pain. Brain sage ( talk) 00:01, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
How does someone block 149.43.100.101 from editing this page. 149.43.100.20 03:36, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
Ditto on the midwestern thing. Montana, historicly is considered either The West or a Plains StateThe Midwest is more like the "breadbasket" states. Montana kinda falls between Great Plains and Rocky Mountain state, and is considered both. I have spent much time studying the bison of the Great Plains, and Montana is definetly considered part of the GP. Mt.holliday ( talk) 03:11, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
I believe that the population figure of 1,087,340 listed in the key at the top of the article is incorrect.
Yes, it's still under 1 million, not sure exact number, though... Montanabw 22:24, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
its a bit pointless saying The state ranks fourth in size but has a relatively low population (with only six states having fewer people) and consequently a very low population density..effectively says the same thing twice in the same sentence
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/United States
Cast your vote! The more responses, the more chances the article will improve and maybe pass the nomination.-- Ryz05 t 22:16, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
the history section of this article and the 'History of Montana' article are really very sad. Someone who knows the subject should greatly expand the history article and then summarize it in this article. Thanks Hmains 02:32, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Please find some Native American ancestry to add to this article. It is a shame that the indigenous people of this state don't have more to say about how things were in the beginning (before settlement) and where they proceeded to (after settlement). I believe this information is vital to understanding the time progression of this beautiful state. 70.57.203.197 16:23, 19 October 2006 (UTC)lightening_storm
Well, if the 'indigenous' people wanted to add more history, I'm sure they would've done it. Most have access to computers, and almost all the internet. And I'm sorry, but if you want history about Montana, most librarys have 'A History of Montana, vol. 1-3' in their catalogs. I'm lucky enough to have it at home. xD
Brain sage (
talk)
23:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
While flicking through articles on US states, I´ve noticed that in many cases the largest reported ancestry is not British (even in some NE states). How can it be? I think a reason for this is that many people who classify themselves as American in the surveys are really of British ancesty. But for this, it might not be easily understood why the majority of American (Caucasian, I mean) surnames are of British origin.
-- Xareu bs 12:18, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
Okay i know for sure Montana is gotten from the spanish Montaña, its rather obvious, there is no word Montana in english, the spanish were around when europeans started naming places in north america and well the only differance is a tilde "˜" ive seen promotional touristty commertials saying thats the origen of the name so im certain its true, but can anyone prove it, perhaps a website for montana state facts? i hvnt been able to find it yet. I'm asking because on the Spanish langauge wikipedia they spell Missouri Misuri and Oregon Oregón and New Mexico Nuevo México so when i noticed Montana was spelled Montana i added the ñ, but they got quite mad at me and demanded i explain myself, they asked me to find one place where its spelled that way, when i was about to ask them to find me a place where missouri is spelled misuri and that he was being dumb the dude blocked me, so yeah. help please Qrc2006 21:25, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
(Question moved from article page) Hi there I dont know something: Why the name of Montana if you write: "Montaña" i.e. Mountain in Spanish language Why? And more Why there are a named Spanish Peak in the middel of Montana State Somebody know?
The current link leads to a village of the Swiss canton of Wallis. I couldn't change it because it's a template, but it needs to link to Category:Montana. 17:23, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
The Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. states format has been updated to include a new Sports section, that covers collegiate sports, amateur sports, and non-team sports (such as hunting and fishing). Please feel free to add this new heading, and supply information about sports in Montana. Please see South_carolina#Sports_in_South_Carolina as an example. NorCalHistory 13:14, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
montana came from monte (hill) like to montero (hunter), montar (get on), montuosa ... montana mean hilly. 212.97.181.220 12:33, 11 January 2007 (UTC) Cualquiera que lea Montana sabe lo que significa, como florida, arizona, argentina o filipina son adjetivos de uso común.
No, freak, it didn't. It comes from 'montańa', which is literally 'mountainous' (sorry if I spelled that wrong.), not whatever you think it comes from. Brain sage ( talk) 23:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC) From google see: "Más usual en la mitad Norte, en el piso inferior y montano..." "...ha sido mencionada como Bosque Pluvial Montano ..." "...La ecorregión de pradera montana y monte alto de Etiopía es una ecorregión de ..." R.A.E.: montano, montana.(Del lat. montānus).
1. adj. Perteneciente o relativo al monte.
□ V.
halcón montano
pimiento montano
Anselmocisneros ( talk) 17:00, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
There is now a proposed WikiProject to deal with the state of Montana at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Montana. Any parties interested in taking part in such a project should indicate as much there, so that we can know if there is sufficient interest to create it. By the way, the banner above belongs to someone else, it isn't mine. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 16:58, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
at the bottom of the page, where all the cities in Montana are listed, you have Billings listed under Montana's name, with (capital) written next to it. Helena is, I thought, the capital of Montana. Am I crazy!?
Laura —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.211.18.250 ( talk) 00:18, 8 March 2007 (UTC).
I know that Montana has a small population and not many famous people are from there, but could someone make a list of famous people from Montana?
Thank you.
7FlushSetzer 20:17, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Thank you, good chum.
7FlushSetzer 16:38, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
this is a good page for homework but if you would could you add on the plain native americans! i strubled to find information!!!!!!!!! thank —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.179.110.65 ( talk) 01:26, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Wow. You 'strubled'? Either way, the Plain Indians aren't exactly notable people from Montana. I mean sure, they're from there and they're kinda important to the history, but they're more prominatly from S. Dakota and N. Dakota. Brain sage ( talk) 23:57, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
The term MT has no reference. The disambiguation page MT has a link to this article. Per WP:V, this link is being removed. FYI: if you want to this article Montana back within the MT (disambiguation) page, this article must have a proper citation which gives reference to MT. If you chose to accept this mission... Good luck! --Some anonymous user 03:06, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
I can't say I much like stubs like this. I don't think stubs must be always the perfect stub, but golly, surely it doesn't do much good just to say that Montana's a U.S. state. What's the purpose of doing that? I personally would rather see five three-sentence stubs than fifteen single sentence-fragment stubs. That's just me--I'm just kvetching. Continue on, if it pleases you. :-) At least, please, make the stubs full sentences with the subject bolded (as I've done here with the Montana article. -- LMS 08:24, 22 September 2001 (UTC)
User 158.111.4.26 added a paragraph of information to the demographics section with no comments here and no research cites. I have my doubts about a number of those statements, especially "The residents of the western Rocky Mountains are largely of British origin." Can anyone vouch for this information, or shall I yank the paragraph? Gary D Robson 18:16, 30 June 2005 (UTC)
Is it not? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshulove ( talk • contribs) 23:31, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
Gotta agree that Montana doesn't qualify for Pac. NW. Idaho doesn't either, if you're going by the climate, etc. -- JT ( talk) 00:35, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
Well I heard that Montana agriculture is deteriorating rapidly due to decreasing amounts of water (on GNP rangers' shows). Is that not a big problem for Montana, enough not to mention that here? Look: http://www.nass.usda.gov/census/census02/volume1/mt/st30_1_001_001.pdf (eg wheat for grain bushels: 180M in 1997, 112M in 2002)
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.21.50.124 ( talk) 20:54, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
I removed the Cite Needed, and included this URL in my reason: http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/23/with-obama-signing-the-bill-what-happens-now/?8au&emc=au WIthin that, it addresses how workers in Montana are now eligible for medical assistance from asbesthos poisoning as a result of vermiculite mining. Guess that pretty much proves it.: -- JT ( talk) 00:33, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
"Native Americans were the first inhabitants of the state of Montana."
The silliness of the term "Native American" is evident here. The term doesn't describe ethnicity. 68.83.72.162 ( talk) 08:50, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Someone familiar with the stipulations should summarize. 68.83.72.162 ( talk) 08:56, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
The second sentence of the third paragraph of the History section currently states: "From interactions with Iroquois Indians between 1812 and 1820, the Salish Indians leaned about Missionaries ("blackrobes") that worked with native peoples teaching about agriculture, medicine, and religion." Surely both the Iroquois and the Salish were familiar with agriculture, medicine and religion before the arrival of the missionaries. Is there any evidence that any of these three areas of knowledge were improved by the work of the missionaries?? Lily20 ( talk) 18:56, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Jack Horner didn't discover "Jane" the T. rex. Burpee's Museum crew did. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.71.67.61 ( talk) 14:10, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
I tossed the census-designated places list because it appears totally random. If there was a scheme to it, this needs to be shared. The only thing I could figure was a possible attempt to list some of the suburbs of the big 7 cities, but it wasn't done properly (the Helena ones were totally screwy, the census-designated places don't match up with suburbs as they are understood, and some of the other "census-designated places" are actually incorporated towns). I'm also curious what criteria (population?) was used for the list of towns, as they also appear somewhat random. Nothing that a bit of clarification wouldn't help. Montanabw (talk) 23:43, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Third generation Montanan myself and I have lived in six of the seven cities listed, I have sadly never lived in Kalispell. It is so beautiful in that area but then so is most of the state. I realize the list wasn’t the greatest but I was going to work on it more and was hoping to get help from others. I guess that isn’t really the way it is done. Some of the unincorporated communities in this state are very important parts of Montana and I feel should be listed. Nonetheless I don’t think I will put any more energy into it at least at this time. I’m just a little to lazy and don’t spend all that much time doing this. Plus I am really not that good at editing as you can tell. Sorry if the” have you ever been to Helena" comment sounded rude. It didn’t sound to me like you had, seems I was way wrong on that one lol. : ) Linda Rider ( talk) 22:36, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
WOW You are just not capable of playing nice are you. Linda Rider ( talk) 02:00, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Why are you edit warring with me? The image you keep putting up of Helena does not fit size wise with the others plus it is not much of an image anyway. It simply shows the top of the mall and some houses. I agree it would be nice to have a picture of the city but I cannot find any in the commons that are good. Aesthetically the Capitol building works better. I don’t mind all the mumbo jumbo being taken off the bottom but can’t I at least have the Capitol image so the images balance out? What is the big deal about that? Just one little image that is all I want! Now in the spirit of compromise I am sure you can do that can’t you?
Soglad Tomeetyou ( talk) 02:47, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
To be blunt, the current "section" (I put section in quotes because I hesitate to call a bulleted list of towns surrounded by seven(!) decent-to-poor quality photos an encyclopedic section) is really bad. Ideally, there would be two or three well-sourced paragraphs discussing a few of the larger towns and a (good) photo or two. Oklahoma#Cities and towns is a good example of what the goal should be. The idea here is to convert raw lists into prose, and transfer excess info or photos to other articles, like a list of cities in MT, demographics of MT, or the articles on the cities themselves. Alexius Horatius 23:43, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Wondering how to edit this State Entry?
The
WikiProject U.S. states standards might help.
I proposing that any relevant content from Eastern Montana, Western Montana, and Central Montana be merged into this article. Not only are these regional designations totally unsourced (I doubt specific boundaries even exist in any reliable source), they appear to only provide a colloquial description of what someone thinks is West, East and Central in Montana. -- Mike Cline ( talk) 20:30, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Western Montana is the western region of the state of Montana. Western Montana though fairing better than much of the nation is still the portion of the state hit hardest by the economic downturn. [1] [2]Places like Missoula have been hit hard with the virtual devastation of its lumber industry. Missoula has lost some of its retail base with the loss of major nation retailers such as Macys. [3] Western Montana has felt the effects of a housing bust as well.
Eastern Montana is the area that consists of the eastern third of Montana - deleted Central Montana is the central region of Montana - deleted
-- Mike Cline ( talk) 13:18, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Same rationale as above -- Mike Cline ( talk) 15:12, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
I think they should all just be deleted they offer nothing. Mizmontana ( talk) 16:32, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Southwestern Montana or Southwest Montana refers to the southwesternmost section of Montana that still lies to the east of the Continental divide. The region extends roughly from Helena in the north to the Bozeman pass in the east and West Yellowstone in the south. The Continental Divide marks the western edge. It encompasses most of the drainage of the Headwaters of the Missouri area, including Madison, Jefferson, Gallatin, Lewis and Clark, and Broadwater counties.
A couple of communities that lie just west of the divide, including Dillon, MT and Butte, MT, are also included, possibly due to their position along Interstate 15 that links them easily to communities east of the divide.
Communities in the far southwest of the state, along the Bitterroot Valley, are referred to as being in Western Montana. (Article deleted on June 11, 2011)-- Mike Cline ( talk) 12:42, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
South Central Montana is a region that includes Yellowstone County, Carbon County, Big Horn County, Stillwater County, Golden Valley County and Musselshell County. Billings is the largest city in this region and in Montana.
== Cities ==* Billings
== Rivers ==* Yellowstone River
(Article deleted June 11, 2011) -- Mike Cline ( talk) 12:42, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
Does anyone else find it to be ironic that Montana has an official language, and that it is English? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.189.106.4 ( talk) 23:04, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
I was just wondering, how much vandalism does the Montana article get by Hannah Montana fans? It seems as though it gets a lot. Perhaps the article on Montana should be protected. 50.81.197.48 ( talk) 04:46, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
Are the same two editors having the sme conflict that they did last January? (See archive.) Seems odd. Rmhermen ( talk) 00:04, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
I reverted an edit on the mMontana page by Montanabw and asked said editor to take it to talk if said editor had anything farther to say about this issue. Montanabw basically deleted an entire section because someone added a town to the section, in my opinion a somewhat important town in Montana. Nonetheless there was no reason to black the entire section. The amusing part of this is that I asked Montanabw to take it to the talk page. Instead Montana simply reverted my edit and told me to take it to take. Unlike Montanabw I am taking it to talk. And then reverting a uncalled-for deletion Soglad Tomeetyou ( talk) 00:09, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
I support the renaming of the section that you did. The “big seven” none of which are all that big, only account for about half of the states population. I hardly think half of the state should be relegated to obscurity because you object to the inclusion of Browning. BTW I have a real life also, three wonderful chidren two jobs. Soglad Tomeetyou ( talk) 10:53, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
I must ask, what part of my statement seemed like a personal attack to you? In rereading what I wrote it seems to me all I did was put the facts on the table. I am sorry if you somehow see that as a personal attack but I really don’t see how it can be viewed in such a light. I do find your response as far more aggressive and having a hostile tone but this is a page devoted to civil debate so I will let it pass. Soglad Tomeetyou ( talk) 11:23, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Far more concerning than an editing conflict between Montanabw and myself is that Rmhermen seems to be stalking us. Soglad Tomeetyou ( talk) 01:32, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
Excuse me, after your VERY personal attack against Rjensen on the Talk:History of Montana page that you just made, I can’t believe you would even say such a thing. I supported the inclusion of the very factual material on the Marijuana issue. I didn’t not mock said editor as you did with your statement “people who have no real knowledge of Montana history”. Soglad Tomeetyou ( talk) 03:34, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Why do you feel the need to be so unkind? You could make your point without the personal attacks Soglad Tomeetyou ( talk) 19:54, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Montana has many towns all play an important part in the make-up of what is Montana. Montana also has it’s seven population centers they each also play an important part in the make-up of what is Montana. The towns in the cities and TOWNS section keep being deleted so I deleted the cities because really a cities and towns section without the towns seems silly and all the cities are already represented in the demographics section. Montana is a very rural state and ALL of the communities of Montana are an important part it and I would like to see them all re-included.
Mizmontana ( talk) 02:44, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
I tend to agree with Mike Cline that eliminating the cities and towns section and addressing individual cities and towns in other parts of the article would be the way to go. Or that it be done as a link. The guild below presented by Drsetay would be good to follow if it is done as a link. Whatever is done I don't think it should be put back in until someone has time to spend with it. There was an attempt to put it back in that didn't work at all. Just a note to Dsetay, "Bozeman's growth rate possibly soon number four" Bozeman is already number four. No big deal just pointing it out. Now this is my personal opinion but given the current trends the way I see it Bozeman is well on it's way to become number two. It may take fifty years maybe less if the city can get a handle on zoning. I also don't think there would be any reason to put anything in about Great Falls "fall" that really would not seem in good faith to me and with all the oil plays in central and eastern Montana Great Falls may see a real up turn not that they have seen a decline they are still seeing growth. anywho Mizmontana ( talk) 21:45, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for doing the work on that Dsetay it looks good Mizmontana ( talk) 02:51, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Okay, so there seems to be no basic consensus on how this article should be structured. I can't find an outline in the wikiprojects sections, so I am going to attempt to make one based on the the only three states at FA-Class Minnesota, Oklahoma, and Virginia and the nearest GA-Class article, South Dakota. Yes, we're being beaten by South Dakota. Here is my suggestion:
Any Comments?
--- Well, yes... I'm a native spanish speaker,
The name Montana comes from the Spanish word Montaña meaning "mountainous."
This is wrong, Montaña means Mountain, no more, no less. Bye — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.3.72.231 ( talk) 05:24, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the list, Dsetay (you forgot to sign it above) No question the article is not of good quality and needs to be improved. I don't have a lot of time to devote to this, but I'd support and offer minor assistance to an improvement drive. The Oklahoma or Minnesota articles would probably be the best guides, as both have notable Native American populations and are more or less in the west. SD would be fine to fill in gaps, but GA being a less fussy standard than FA, I'd split any debates in favor of an FA structure. Montanabw (talk) 19:25, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
I'm not trying to be a butthead, but if we are going to ever move this article toward GA, we will need to have a pinpoint cite for every quotation in the paragraph, and probably multiple cites for the "mountainous" translation, as the variant given here is not one commonly seen. I'm not really contesting the accuracy of the material, just that I know we have to cite it up the wazoo and back again eventually, so now is better than later. Also, be very careful that we are not too closely paraphrasing from the source, there is a major kafuffle about copyvio issues on the wiki-drama boards, so I encourage great care be taken. The other thing that I suspect will come up will be a request that we use the citation templates and not merely ref tags with manual formatting. From hard experience, it is easier to do these as they are created than to fix them all later. Montanabw (talk) 04:35, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
Why do we have a section on antipodes? It is now ref'd to a "lat/long finder" subpage which doesn't seem to be a WP:RS. I would think we would need a reference that establishes notability for this bit of geo-nerd trivia for this article. Vsmith ( talk) 12:53, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
I have a goal to get this to GA then FA. Help appreciated. Some notes and thoughts are:
Psky, sorry for the belated entry here, but am juggling a lot of things at the moment. I concur with those who say tag the un-cited material. The sentiments and ideas may be right, but the content just may need some verification and rewording once sources are found. I'll do my part to work on sourcing. -- Mike Cline ( talk) 23:43, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
The first two sentences in the lead although not inaccurate, they paint the wrong picture. You will see from this link [3] that the entire state contains mountain ranges. Additionally, I am not certain that many of the eastern ranges are considered part of the "Rocky Mountains". This needs to be rewritten to paint a more accurate picture.
On the economy, the source indicates that Agriculture, Tourism and Lumber in that order are the largest contributors (revenue) to the economy. As written, it doesn't give the impression that tourism is a major contributors even through it is growing at a rate faster than other sectors. -- Mike Cline ( talk) 23:58, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
The source seems a little dated. Everything is 2004 2005 pre recession and pre Bakken. Those two events changed Montana's economy a great deal. Mizmontana ( talk) 21:41, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
So far as the oil gas coal thing... The 1970's were forty some years ago. At that time the United States was the energy user and polluter of the world. The world we now live in is a global economy. Most estimates say the Bakken is life time play at least. The whole world wants as much energy as they can get from where ever they can get it. Coal is losing out as an energy source in the United States but China wants Montana coal. Six years ago zero coal trains went past my house headed west. Four years ago one maybe two within the last couple years four to seven trains daily. This energy thing is not going away short of a world wide depression, which would kill everything. The housing economy is starting to come back that will help lumber. Mizmontana ( talk) 04:40, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
I brought up ref format (which was wildly inconsistent) above and suggested sfn format, which I've already started standardizing on. Please put new refs in that format, it'll save tons of time and help standardization. Thanks! PumpkinSky talk 23:40, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
I think we should be consistent in our prose when referring to Montana cities and other locales in the state. In some prose the state name is always appended, in other prose it is not. Which of these styles should we adopt:
The river begins at Three Forks, Montana or The river begins at Three Forks.
I much prefer the latter as adding Montana to every mention of a city seems redundant, since this is an article about Montana. Of course, it would be perfectly logical to identify the state of cities or locales outside of Montana. -- Mike Cline ( talk) 13:59, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
The source cited conflicts with the next to last sentence in the para.
Source (2009): Montana is the home of approximately 66,000+ people of Indian heritage. The majority of these people reside on one of the seven large Indian reservations while many others live in the major cities of Missoula, Billings, Great Falls, Butte, Helena and Miles City. p 4.
Next to last sentence: Approximately 63% of all Native people live off the reservations, concentrated in the larger Montana cities with the largest concentration of urban Indians in Great Falls.
Need to see a source for the 63% off the rez. -- Mike Cline ( talk) 21:47, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
I have a copy of this PumpkinSky talk 02:35, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Are you sure that the name is Spanish and not Latin?
I removed the "from Latin" part because it was confusing and not needed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Funguymon ( talk • contribs) 23:59, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
It needs to be changed from Latin to Spanish because mountain in Spanish is montana where the Latin translation that I looked up is mons montis. I remember my 8th grade history teacher tell us that a specific senator (can't remember who) asked for it to be Montana because he thought the name was beautiful, and I believe he tried to apply it to other states as well. I do not have a source on this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.145.229.74 ( talk) 01:57, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Other Spanish-named states retain their original names in Spanish (see Tejas, Nuevo México) in spite of English adaptations. -- Error 01:43, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Yes, it's Spanish. Or else the State Government is wrong, because that's what they say too. Montanabw 22:19, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Does the above have a source? I couldn't find it on Montana's state website, but I did find this: "Created out of the Idaho Territory in 1864, the name Montana is a derivation of the Latin word "montaanus" which means mountainous." Shearer, Benjamin F. and Barbara S. State Names, Seals, Flags and Symbols Greenwood Press, Westport, Connecticut - 1994 ISBN 978-0313315343 Bdusel ( talk) 00:30, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
"... and on the west and southwest is the Idaho border, marked by the Bitterroot River."
The Bitterroot River marks no such boundary, although the crest of the Bitterroot Range does mark a portion of the above referenced border.
"Montana is the only state in the union that have rivers that flow into three different oceans: The Pacific Ocean, the Gulf of Mexico, and Hudson Bay." I'm curious how these are three oceans. If Montana's rivers run into these three bodies of water, then I would say the water ultimately flows into the Pacific and the Atlantic, as both the Hudson Bay (via the Labrador Sea) and the Gulf of Mexico eventually flow into the Atlantic Ocean.
I think its safe to go back to three oceans and it sounds cool.
The hudson bay is part of the Artic Ocean, the gulf of mexico, the Atlantic Ocean, and The Pacific Ocean.
You should have left is as "only state in the union". The page now says "Montana is the only geographic area in the world whose rivers form parts of three major watersheds (i.e. where two continental divides intersect): The Pacific Ocean, the Gulf of Mexico, and Hudson Bay which are divided atop Triple Divide Peak in Glacier National Park." This is not really at all true. Off the top of my head, Canada has four: Hudson Bay, Arctic Ocean, Pacific Ocean, Atlantic Ocean. Even if we're talking about subnational entities, the Canadian provinces of Saskatchewan and Alberta both also contain three watersheds: Gulf of Mexico, Hudson Bay, and Arctic Ocean. I don't know what to change the satement to, but what it says now isn't accurate. AntidoteWasHad ( talk) 23:08, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
What makes Three Forks any more of a "historical" town than, say, Deer Lodge or Anaconda or Red Lodge? Why add this distinction, especially when the only historical reference on the Three Forks page is a very short paragraph about Sacajawea? I think the header and table should be removed and Three Forks folded in with the list above it. Comments? Gary D Robson 13:51, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I think it would be better to have ghost towns as a category since there are so many that are around the state. Also, many of them are considered Historical Landmarks. Mt.holliday ( talk) —Preceding comment was added at 03:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps 'geologically important' would be a better heading. Seeing as that's where the Missouri river formed. Brain sage ( talk) 23:40, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
A user insists on changing "vast Great Plains" to "endless Great Plains." I am not sure what is wrong with the word "vast" to describe the Great Plains; they are indeed vast. They are not, however, "endless," neither literally nor metaphorically. I have no idea why this user believes it is more neutral, NPOV and accurate to describe the Great Plains as endless instead of vast. But I am going to take this to the highest levels of Wikipedia arbitration if he continues to revert. Moncrief 16:30, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
Does anybody see any crying need to edit Saguna Brahman, Corpus Christi Hooks, and even the fictional Azeroth (world) and Ages of Myst III: Exile for a similar reason? Or, quite relevant to Moncrief's arguments, how about Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, with its talk about "endless 'edit wars'"? The burden on justifying a change should lie with the proponent of the change. Gene Nygaard 03:52, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
Gene, this is irrational. "Vast" is close enough to "endless" and it's literally correct, too. Ashibaka ( tock) 05:12, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
Definately Vast. Astrokey44 11:27, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
I support Moncrief's "vast". While I understand that votes are viewed with disdain on Wikipedia [so please don't quote "Wikipedia is not a democracy" at me), I'd say all else fails, put it to a vote. I believe a consensus, or near-consensus will emerge, and we can move on. MCB 21:14, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
I also support "vast." There's no contest, really. "Endless" and "seemingly endless" are both suboptimal, at best. You might just as well refer to the plains as being "infinite." They are, of course, not. They are vast. IronDuke 05:27, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
Seems like a petty argument, but I guess it's important to someone. The plains of Montana end at the border of that state. If you're in Sidney & head east about 10 miles, you'll be in North Dakota. I doubt if the good people there would appreciate you calling THEIR part of the Great Plains, "the Montana Plains", because that part ended at the border. "Vast" is a much more accurate term for an encyclopedia, however, "seemingly endless", as already suggested, should satisfy anyone. Just my 2 cents. MercForHire 04:00, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
The conflict seems to be resolved as "vast" has not been reverted for many days. Thank you everyone for your comments.
Moncrief
05:39, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
wow, you guys. just wow.
67.172.61.222
21:37, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
I don't want to be the kill-joy, and I'm not, since I'm not enjoying the waste of space. Grow up, and if you want to argue about what defines a dictionary, or whether or not 'endless' is an acceptable term, go to BlogSpot, or somewhere else where they don't care. And either way, I wouldn't call Montana '90% plains'. It's NOT that much. Of course, I spent all my life in the Helena Valley, so maybe I'll speak for myself. How about we just leave it at 'the Great Plains' instead of elaborating?
Brain sage (
talk)
23:46, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
"Oro y plata"
Why is Montana's State Motto Spanish? There must be, what, all of 3 Spanish speakers in the state? :D
The end of the introductory portion of this article says:
"The largest city is Billings with an area of around 144,417.
What's that number supposed to represent (and why is it bold?) Dxco 06:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
I was just wondering why the race section was lowered to three races instead of the earlier version: 89.5% White 6.2% Native American 2.0% Hispanic 0.5% Asian 0.3% Black 1.7% Mixed race. I think unless there is some really good reason (i.e. new census data) these stats should be reverted.-- Tainter 23:35, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm, no hispanic population exists in Montana? Amazing, someone took that out.-- Hellogoodsir 20:33, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Someone needed to fix it anyways. It adds up to 100.2%, and it has to be out of 100% Simple error, but a pain. Brain sage ( talk) 00:01, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
How does someone block 149.43.100.101 from editing this page. 149.43.100.20 03:36, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
Ditto on the midwestern thing. Montana, historicly is considered either The West or a Plains StateThe Midwest is more like the "breadbasket" states. Montana kinda falls between Great Plains and Rocky Mountain state, and is considered both. I have spent much time studying the bison of the Great Plains, and Montana is definetly considered part of the GP. Mt.holliday ( talk) 03:11, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
I believe that the population figure of 1,087,340 listed in the key at the top of the article is incorrect.
Yes, it's still under 1 million, not sure exact number, though... Montanabw 22:24, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
its a bit pointless saying The state ranks fourth in size but has a relatively low population (with only six states having fewer people) and consequently a very low population density..effectively says the same thing twice in the same sentence
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/United States
Cast your vote! The more responses, the more chances the article will improve and maybe pass the nomination.-- Ryz05 t 22:16, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
the history section of this article and the 'History of Montana' article are really very sad. Someone who knows the subject should greatly expand the history article and then summarize it in this article. Thanks Hmains 02:32, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Please find some Native American ancestry to add to this article. It is a shame that the indigenous people of this state don't have more to say about how things were in the beginning (before settlement) and where they proceeded to (after settlement). I believe this information is vital to understanding the time progression of this beautiful state. 70.57.203.197 16:23, 19 October 2006 (UTC)lightening_storm
Well, if the 'indigenous' people wanted to add more history, I'm sure they would've done it. Most have access to computers, and almost all the internet. And I'm sorry, but if you want history about Montana, most librarys have 'A History of Montana, vol. 1-3' in their catalogs. I'm lucky enough to have it at home. xD
Brain sage (
talk)
23:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
While flicking through articles on US states, I´ve noticed that in many cases the largest reported ancestry is not British (even in some NE states). How can it be? I think a reason for this is that many people who classify themselves as American in the surveys are really of British ancesty. But for this, it might not be easily understood why the majority of American (Caucasian, I mean) surnames are of British origin.
-- Xareu bs 12:18, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
Okay i know for sure Montana is gotten from the spanish Montaña, its rather obvious, there is no word Montana in english, the spanish were around when europeans started naming places in north america and well the only differance is a tilde "˜" ive seen promotional touristty commertials saying thats the origen of the name so im certain its true, but can anyone prove it, perhaps a website for montana state facts? i hvnt been able to find it yet. I'm asking because on the Spanish langauge wikipedia they spell Missouri Misuri and Oregon Oregón and New Mexico Nuevo México so when i noticed Montana was spelled Montana i added the ñ, but they got quite mad at me and demanded i explain myself, they asked me to find one place where its spelled that way, when i was about to ask them to find me a place where missouri is spelled misuri and that he was being dumb the dude blocked me, so yeah. help please Qrc2006 21:25, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
(Question moved from article page) Hi there I dont know something: Why the name of Montana if you write: "Montaña" i.e. Mountain in Spanish language Why? And more Why there are a named Spanish Peak in the middel of Montana State Somebody know?
The current link leads to a village of the Swiss canton of Wallis. I couldn't change it because it's a template, but it needs to link to Category:Montana. 17:23, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
The Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. states format has been updated to include a new Sports section, that covers collegiate sports, amateur sports, and non-team sports (such as hunting and fishing). Please feel free to add this new heading, and supply information about sports in Montana. Please see South_carolina#Sports_in_South_Carolina as an example. NorCalHistory 13:14, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
montana came from monte (hill) like to montero (hunter), montar (get on), montuosa ... montana mean hilly. 212.97.181.220 12:33, 11 January 2007 (UTC) Cualquiera que lea Montana sabe lo que significa, como florida, arizona, argentina o filipina son adjetivos de uso común.
No, freak, it didn't. It comes from 'montańa', which is literally 'mountainous' (sorry if I spelled that wrong.), not whatever you think it comes from. Brain sage ( talk) 23:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC) From google see: "Más usual en la mitad Norte, en el piso inferior y montano..." "...ha sido mencionada como Bosque Pluvial Montano ..." "...La ecorregión de pradera montana y monte alto de Etiopía es una ecorregión de ..." R.A.E.: montano, montana.(Del lat. montānus).
1. adj. Perteneciente o relativo al monte.
□ V.
halcón montano
pimiento montano
Anselmocisneros ( talk) 17:00, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
There is now a proposed WikiProject to deal with the state of Montana at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Montana. Any parties interested in taking part in such a project should indicate as much there, so that we can know if there is sufficient interest to create it. By the way, the banner above belongs to someone else, it isn't mine. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 16:58, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
at the bottom of the page, where all the cities in Montana are listed, you have Billings listed under Montana's name, with (capital) written next to it. Helena is, I thought, the capital of Montana. Am I crazy!?
Laura —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.211.18.250 ( talk) 00:18, 8 March 2007 (UTC).
I know that Montana has a small population and not many famous people are from there, but could someone make a list of famous people from Montana?
Thank you.
7FlushSetzer 20:17, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Thank you, good chum.
7FlushSetzer 16:38, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
this is a good page for homework but if you would could you add on the plain native americans! i strubled to find information!!!!!!!!! thank —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.179.110.65 ( talk) 01:26, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Wow. You 'strubled'? Either way, the Plain Indians aren't exactly notable people from Montana. I mean sure, they're from there and they're kinda important to the history, but they're more prominatly from S. Dakota and N. Dakota. Brain sage ( talk) 23:57, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
The term MT has no reference. The disambiguation page MT has a link to this article. Per WP:V, this link is being removed. FYI: if you want to this article Montana back within the MT (disambiguation) page, this article must have a proper citation which gives reference to MT. If you chose to accept this mission... Good luck! --Some anonymous user 03:06, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
I can't say I much like stubs like this. I don't think stubs must be always the perfect stub, but golly, surely it doesn't do much good just to say that Montana's a U.S. state. What's the purpose of doing that? I personally would rather see five three-sentence stubs than fifteen single sentence-fragment stubs. That's just me--I'm just kvetching. Continue on, if it pleases you. :-) At least, please, make the stubs full sentences with the subject bolded (as I've done here with the Montana article. -- LMS 08:24, 22 September 2001 (UTC)
User 158.111.4.26 added a paragraph of information to the demographics section with no comments here and no research cites. I have my doubts about a number of those statements, especially "The residents of the western Rocky Mountains are largely of British origin." Can anyone vouch for this information, or shall I yank the paragraph? Gary D Robson 18:16, 30 June 2005 (UTC)
Is it not? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshulove ( talk • contribs) 23:31, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
Gotta agree that Montana doesn't qualify for Pac. NW. Idaho doesn't either, if you're going by the climate, etc. -- JT ( talk) 00:35, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
Well I heard that Montana agriculture is deteriorating rapidly due to decreasing amounts of water (on GNP rangers' shows). Is that not a big problem for Montana, enough not to mention that here? Look: http://www.nass.usda.gov/census/census02/volume1/mt/st30_1_001_001.pdf (eg wheat for grain bushels: 180M in 1997, 112M in 2002)
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.21.50.124 ( talk) 20:54, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
I removed the Cite Needed, and included this URL in my reason: http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/23/with-obama-signing-the-bill-what-happens-now/?8au&emc=au WIthin that, it addresses how workers in Montana are now eligible for medical assistance from asbesthos poisoning as a result of vermiculite mining. Guess that pretty much proves it.: -- JT ( talk) 00:33, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
"Native Americans were the first inhabitants of the state of Montana."
The silliness of the term "Native American" is evident here. The term doesn't describe ethnicity. 68.83.72.162 ( talk) 08:50, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Someone familiar with the stipulations should summarize. 68.83.72.162 ( talk) 08:56, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
The second sentence of the third paragraph of the History section currently states: "From interactions with Iroquois Indians between 1812 and 1820, the Salish Indians leaned about Missionaries ("blackrobes") that worked with native peoples teaching about agriculture, medicine, and religion." Surely both the Iroquois and the Salish were familiar with agriculture, medicine and religion before the arrival of the missionaries. Is there any evidence that any of these three areas of knowledge were improved by the work of the missionaries?? Lily20 ( talk) 18:56, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Jack Horner didn't discover "Jane" the T. rex. Burpee's Museum crew did. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.71.67.61 ( talk) 14:10, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
I tossed the census-designated places list because it appears totally random. If there was a scheme to it, this needs to be shared. The only thing I could figure was a possible attempt to list some of the suburbs of the big 7 cities, but it wasn't done properly (the Helena ones were totally screwy, the census-designated places don't match up with suburbs as they are understood, and some of the other "census-designated places" are actually incorporated towns). I'm also curious what criteria (population?) was used for the list of towns, as they also appear somewhat random. Nothing that a bit of clarification wouldn't help. Montanabw (talk) 23:43, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Third generation Montanan myself and I have lived in six of the seven cities listed, I have sadly never lived in Kalispell. It is so beautiful in that area but then so is most of the state. I realize the list wasn’t the greatest but I was going to work on it more and was hoping to get help from others. I guess that isn’t really the way it is done. Some of the unincorporated communities in this state are very important parts of Montana and I feel should be listed. Nonetheless I don’t think I will put any more energy into it at least at this time. I’m just a little to lazy and don’t spend all that much time doing this. Plus I am really not that good at editing as you can tell. Sorry if the” have you ever been to Helena" comment sounded rude. It didn’t sound to me like you had, seems I was way wrong on that one lol. : ) Linda Rider ( talk) 22:36, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
WOW You are just not capable of playing nice are you. Linda Rider ( talk) 02:00, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Why are you edit warring with me? The image you keep putting up of Helena does not fit size wise with the others plus it is not much of an image anyway. It simply shows the top of the mall and some houses. I agree it would be nice to have a picture of the city but I cannot find any in the commons that are good. Aesthetically the Capitol building works better. I don’t mind all the mumbo jumbo being taken off the bottom but can’t I at least have the Capitol image so the images balance out? What is the big deal about that? Just one little image that is all I want! Now in the spirit of compromise I am sure you can do that can’t you?
Soglad Tomeetyou ( talk) 02:47, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
To be blunt, the current "section" (I put section in quotes because I hesitate to call a bulleted list of towns surrounded by seven(!) decent-to-poor quality photos an encyclopedic section) is really bad. Ideally, there would be two or three well-sourced paragraphs discussing a few of the larger towns and a (good) photo or two. Oklahoma#Cities and towns is a good example of what the goal should be. The idea here is to convert raw lists into prose, and transfer excess info or photos to other articles, like a list of cities in MT, demographics of MT, or the articles on the cities themselves. Alexius Horatius 23:43, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Wondering how to edit this State Entry?
The
WikiProject U.S. states standards might help.
I proposing that any relevant content from Eastern Montana, Western Montana, and Central Montana be merged into this article. Not only are these regional designations totally unsourced (I doubt specific boundaries even exist in any reliable source), they appear to only provide a colloquial description of what someone thinks is West, East and Central in Montana. -- Mike Cline ( talk) 20:30, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Western Montana is the western region of the state of Montana. Western Montana though fairing better than much of the nation is still the portion of the state hit hardest by the economic downturn. [1] [2]Places like Missoula have been hit hard with the virtual devastation of its lumber industry. Missoula has lost some of its retail base with the loss of major nation retailers such as Macys. [3] Western Montana has felt the effects of a housing bust as well.
Eastern Montana is the area that consists of the eastern third of Montana - deleted Central Montana is the central region of Montana - deleted
-- Mike Cline ( talk) 13:18, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Same rationale as above -- Mike Cline ( talk) 15:12, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
I think they should all just be deleted they offer nothing. Mizmontana ( talk) 16:32, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Southwestern Montana or Southwest Montana refers to the southwesternmost section of Montana that still lies to the east of the Continental divide. The region extends roughly from Helena in the north to the Bozeman pass in the east and West Yellowstone in the south. The Continental Divide marks the western edge. It encompasses most of the drainage of the Headwaters of the Missouri area, including Madison, Jefferson, Gallatin, Lewis and Clark, and Broadwater counties.
A couple of communities that lie just west of the divide, including Dillon, MT and Butte, MT, are also included, possibly due to their position along Interstate 15 that links them easily to communities east of the divide.
Communities in the far southwest of the state, along the Bitterroot Valley, are referred to as being in Western Montana. (Article deleted on June 11, 2011)-- Mike Cline ( talk) 12:42, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
South Central Montana is a region that includes Yellowstone County, Carbon County, Big Horn County, Stillwater County, Golden Valley County and Musselshell County. Billings is the largest city in this region and in Montana.
== Cities ==* Billings
== Rivers ==* Yellowstone River
(Article deleted June 11, 2011) -- Mike Cline ( talk) 12:42, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
Does anyone else find it to be ironic that Montana has an official language, and that it is English? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.189.106.4 ( talk) 23:04, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
I was just wondering, how much vandalism does the Montana article get by Hannah Montana fans? It seems as though it gets a lot. Perhaps the article on Montana should be protected. 50.81.197.48 ( talk) 04:46, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
Are the same two editors having the sme conflict that they did last January? (See archive.) Seems odd. Rmhermen ( talk) 00:04, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
I reverted an edit on the mMontana page by Montanabw and asked said editor to take it to talk if said editor had anything farther to say about this issue. Montanabw basically deleted an entire section because someone added a town to the section, in my opinion a somewhat important town in Montana. Nonetheless there was no reason to black the entire section. The amusing part of this is that I asked Montanabw to take it to the talk page. Instead Montana simply reverted my edit and told me to take it to take. Unlike Montanabw I am taking it to talk. And then reverting a uncalled-for deletion Soglad Tomeetyou ( talk) 00:09, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
I support the renaming of the section that you did. The “big seven” none of which are all that big, only account for about half of the states population. I hardly think half of the state should be relegated to obscurity because you object to the inclusion of Browning. BTW I have a real life also, three wonderful chidren two jobs. Soglad Tomeetyou ( talk) 10:53, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
I must ask, what part of my statement seemed like a personal attack to you? In rereading what I wrote it seems to me all I did was put the facts on the table. I am sorry if you somehow see that as a personal attack but I really don’t see how it can be viewed in such a light. I do find your response as far more aggressive and having a hostile tone but this is a page devoted to civil debate so I will let it pass. Soglad Tomeetyou ( talk) 11:23, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Far more concerning than an editing conflict between Montanabw and myself is that Rmhermen seems to be stalking us. Soglad Tomeetyou ( talk) 01:32, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
Excuse me, after your VERY personal attack against Rjensen on the Talk:History of Montana page that you just made, I can’t believe you would even say such a thing. I supported the inclusion of the very factual material on the Marijuana issue. I didn’t not mock said editor as you did with your statement “people who have no real knowledge of Montana history”. Soglad Tomeetyou ( talk) 03:34, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Why do you feel the need to be so unkind? You could make your point without the personal attacks Soglad Tomeetyou ( talk) 19:54, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Montana has many towns all play an important part in the make-up of what is Montana. Montana also has it’s seven population centers they each also play an important part in the make-up of what is Montana. The towns in the cities and TOWNS section keep being deleted so I deleted the cities because really a cities and towns section without the towns seems silly and all the cities are already represented in the demographics section. Montana is a very rural state and ALL of the communities of Montana are an important part it and I would like to see them all re-included.
Mizmontana ( talk) 02:44, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
I tend to agree with Mike Cline that eliminating the cities and towns section and addressing individual cities and towns in other parts of the article would be the way to go. Or that it be done as a link. The guild below presented by Drsetay would be good to follow if it is done as a link. Whatever is done I don't think it should be put back in until someone has time to spend with it. There was an attempt to put it back in that didn't work at all. Just a note to Dsetay, "Bozeman's growth rate possibly soon number four" Bozeman is already number four. No big deal just pointing it out. Now this is my personal opinion but given the current trends the way I see it Bozeman is well on it's way to become number two. It may take fifty years maybe less if the city can get a handle on zoning. I also don't think there would be any reason to put anything in about Great Falls "fall" that really would not seem in good faith to me and with all the oil plays in central and eastern Montana Great Falls may see a real up turn not that they have seen a decline they are still seeing growth. anywho Mizmontana ( talk) 21:45, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for doing the work on that Dsetay it looks good Mizmontana ( talk) 02:51, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Okay, so there seems to be no basic consensus on how this article should be structured. I can't find an outline in the wikiprojects sections, so I am going to attempt to make one based on the the only three states at FA-Class Minnesota, Oklahoma, and Virginia and the nearest GA-Class article, South Dakota. Yes, we're being beaten by South Dakota. Here is my suggestion:
Any Comments?
--- Well, yes... I'm a native spanish speaker,
The name Montana comes from the Spanish word Montaña meaning "mountainous."
This is wrong, Montaña means Mountain, no more, no less. Bye — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.3.72.231 ( talk) 05:24, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the list, Dsetay (you forgot to sign it above) No question the article is not of good quality and needs to be improved. I don't have a lot of time to devote to this, but I'd support and offer minor assistance to an improvement drive. The Oklahoma or Minnesota articles would probably be the best guides, as both have notable Native American populations and are more or less in the west. SD would be fine to fill in gaps, but GA being a less fussy standard than FA, I'd split any debates in favor of an FA structure. Montanabw (talk) 19:25, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
I'm not trying to be a butthead, but if we are going to ever move this article toward GA, we will need to have a pinpoint cite for every quotation in the paragraph, and probably multiple cites for the "mountainous" translation, as the variant given here is not one commonly seen. I'm not really contesting the accuracy of the material, just that I know we have to cite it up the wazoo and back again eventually, so now is better than later. Also, be very careful that we are not too closely paraphrasing from the source, there is a major kafuffle about copyvio issues on the wiki-drama boards, so I encourage great care be taken. The other thing that I suspect will come up will be a request that we use the citation templates and not merely ref tags with manual formatting. From hard experience, it is easier to do these as they are created than to fix them all later. Montanabw (talk) 04:35, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
Why do we have a section on antipodes? It is now ref'd to a "lat/long finder" subpage which doesn't seem to be a WP:RS. I would think we would need a reference that establishes notability for this bit of geo-nerd trivia for this article. Vsmith ( talk) 12:53, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
I have a goal to get this to GA then FA. Help appreciated. Some notes and thoughts are:
Psky, sorry for the belated entry here, but am juggling a lot of things at the moment. I concur with those who say tag the un-cited material. The sentiments and ideas may be right, but the content just may need some verification and rewording once sources are found. I'll do my part to work on sourcing. -- Mike Cline ( talk) 23:43, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
The first two sentences in the lead although not inaccurate, they paint the wrong picture. You will see from this link [3] that the entire state contains mountain ranges. Additionally, I am not certain that many of the eastern ranges are considered part of the "Rocky Mountains". This needs to be rewritten to paint a more accurate picture.
On the economy, the source indicates that Agriculture, Tourism and Lumber in that order are the largest contributors (revenue) to the economy. As written, it doesn't give the impression that tourism is a major contributors even through it is growing at a rate faster than other sectors. -- Mike Cline ( talk) 23:58, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
The source seems a little dated. Everything is 2004 2005 pre recession and pre Bakken. Those two events changed Montana's economy a great deal. Mizmontana ( talk) 21:41, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
So far as the oil gas coal thing... The 1970's were forty some years ago. At that time the United States was the energy user and polluter of the world. The world we now live in is a global economy. Most estimates say the Bakken is life time play at least. The whole world wants as much energy as they can get from where ever they can get it. Coal is losing out as an energy source in the United States but China wants Montana coal. Six years ago zero coal trains went past my house headed west. Four years ago one maybe two within the last couple years four to seven trains daily. This energy thing is not going away short of a world wide depression, which would kill everything. The housing economy is starting to come back that will help lumber. Mizmontana ( talk) 04:40, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
I brought up ref format (which was wildly inconsistent) above and suggested sfn format, which I've already started standardizing on. Please put new refs in that format, it'll save tons of time and help standardization. Thanks! PumpkinSky talk 23:40, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
I think we should be consistent in our prose when referring to Montana cities and other locales in the state. In some prose the state name is always appended, in other prose it is not. Which of these styles should we adopt:
The river begins at Three Forks, Montana or The river begins at Three Forks.
I much prefer the latter as adding Montana to every mention of a city seems redundant, since this is an article about Montana. Of course, it would be perfectly logical to identify the state of cities or locales outside of Montana. -- Mike Cline ( talk) 13:59, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
The source cited conflicts with the next to last sentence in the para.
Source (2009): Montana is the home of approximately 66,000+ people of Indian heritage. The majority of these people reside on one of the seven large Indian reservations while many others live in the major cities of Missoula, Billings, Great Falls, Butte, Helena and Miles City. p 4.
Next to last sentence: Approximately 63% of all Native people live off the reservations, concentrated in the larger Montana cities with the largest concentration of urban Indians in Great Falls.
Need to see a source for the 63% off the rez. -- Mike Cline ( talk) 21:47, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
I have a copy of this PumpkinSky talk 02:35, 4 April 2013 (UTC)