Talk:Kansas

message: Wichita is the largest metro area in Kansas? Absolutley not. Wichita is not even a major city. It's metro population is UNDER 1 million people. In Kansas alone it only has around 600 thousand. Kansas City is a major city and metro area with population exceeding 2 million people. Even the Kansas suburbs of Kansas City, including Johnson County (with 500 thousand), Wyandotte (with 150K), and Leavenworth (50k) are larger than the entire Wichita MSA. I have changed the infobox accordingly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.8.212.191 (talk) 10:06, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, that's all fine and dandy, except that the KC metro area isn't based in Kansas...If you are looking for the biggest one based in Kansas, it is the Wichita metro. Ks0stm (T•C•G) 14:34, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Disagree, regardless of largest city in the particular area, a "metro area" is simply defined as "a contiguous area of relatively high population density". By that definition, the KCK/JoCo area can be considered a metro area, and one that is larger than the Wichita metro. The July 2007 census estimate put the Wichita metro at 596K, while the latest estimates put Johnson and Wyandotte counties alone at 688k. I've changed it to reflect Kansas City, KS metro area. Wichita is certainly the largest city in Kansas, but by definition, is not the largest metro. Ryan2845 (talk) 17:39, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Adding my voice:  I think KC Metro should count, even if it doesn't qualify as largest city.  The same issue arises with Maryland and Virginia, where the D.C. centered Metro area is the largest.  In Maryland, it is referred to as the Baltimore-Washington Metropolitan Area (the population center is closer to D.C., but the suburbs stretch between them), and in Virginia simply as Northern Virginia.  In the latter case, it isn't properly centered around any particularly large city in Virginia (there are cities within it, but they aren't the center; NoVA is an adjunct of D.C.). If there is some name for the KC Metro area that distinguishes it from Kansas City, feel free to use it, but if it has the largest population, it doesn't matter if it is centered around an out of state city. -ShadowRangerRIT (talk) 17:54, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

text: I could go with that, just so long as it is differentiated from being Kansas City, MO (although technically the same metro area)...In other words, how it is now is fine by me. Good thinking putting Kansas City, Kansas metro area.  Ks0stm (T•C•G) 20:27, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

text: Is it possible to tinker with the infobox to where it has "largest metro area" and "largest metro area centered in state" or something similar?? Ks0stm (T•C•G) 20:37, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thats what I was thinking, but I can't figure it out.  We could always propose a change at the city Infobox page.  Grey Wanderer (talk) 20:48, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Largest Metro Area 

message: The Topography section includes the statements
:It is a popular belief that Kansas is the flattest state in the nation, reinforced by a well known 2003 study stating that Kansas was indeed "flatter than a pancake." [ref]Study finds Kansas Flatter Than Pancake[/ref] This has since been debunked, with most scientists ranking Kansas somewhere between 20th and 30th flattest state, depending on measurement method.[ref]Fracas over Kansas pancake flap[/ref]
The study may have been well known and even scientific, but it was not a serious scientific study. The first cited article says of the study:
:The results, published in the tongue-in-cheek Annals of Improbable Research, have created a flapjack flap among geologists and others in Kansas.
:"My guess is you could put Colorado in there, the way they're calculating it, and it would be flatter than a pancake," said Lee Allison, director of the Kansas Geological Survey. "I think this is part of a vast breakfast food conspiracy to denigrate Kansas. It's a cheap shot."
Sheesh, the Annals of Improbable Research. Should it even be mentioned? Anyhow, I have added a link to the "study" itself on AIR's website, so that anyone bothering to even look at the URL will see that it is indeed "improbable".
--Thnidu (talk) 03:23, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's worth including, simply for the sake of debunking or showing it to be a joke. As a Kansan, i've numerous times had someone from out of state say something to me along the lines of: "Didn't some study prove Kansas was flatter than a pancake?" Most people seem to believe it was a genuine study, not a joke. Might help to change "well known 2003 study" to something like "well known 2003 tongue-in-cheek study" or something like that. Ryan2845 (talk) 03:50, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Thnidu (talk) 00:17, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  "flatter than a pancake" 

message: I have never never heard people from Kansas referred to as Kansonians. It's usually (or always) Kansans. Can't figure out how to change it myself, though.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramsesemerson (talk • contribs) 17:10, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kansonians 

message: In the section entitled "Important cities and towns" I have changed the chart from cities with a population of 10,000 (37 cities) to cities with 15,000 (25 cities).  I thought the chart with 37 cities took up undue space on the page, and I don't believe the section loses much by eliminating those towns with populations between 10,000 and 14,999.  It's a fairly  arbitrary cut-off in either case, but one argument for adopting 15,000 as a meaningful number is that this is the population statutorily required to become a "city of the first class" in Kansas.  Comments on this change are welcome. -Kgwo1972 (talk) 21:40, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good, I updated the table data recently and wasn't sure why 10k was the cutoff. At least 15k has the "first class" city reasoning behind it. There's a lot of cities in kansas hovering around the 10k range, but not many nearing 15k, so hopefully it will keep the table from needing extensive updating too. Ryan2845 (talk) 22:25, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Largest cities chart 

message: Please refrain from changing the capital city from Topeka to Google.  This is just a publicity stunt by the mayor to get Google to notice the city.  Changing the official name of a city--especially one as established as Topeka--takes more than just a simple "proclamation".  If you change the name to Google, it WILL be reverted. Bhall87Four Scoreand Seven 04:22, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I added an inline note about it; probably won't keep all of it out but should help a bit. Go ahead and remove it in after a month if I haven't done it already. AlexiusHoratius 04:36, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

text: So?  This whole publicity stunt is over and done (has been over and done since April 2nd) and probably 95-98% of people have forgotten it even happened.  Also, if included in an article it would be better placed in the Topeka, Kansas article, not in the Kansas article.  Bhall87Four Scoreand Seven 17:28, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: "Google, Kansas"

message: Is there a reason that Kansas doesn't have any history for the last 100 years?   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.146.244.56 (talk) 01:27, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: What kind of history are you talking about?  California's history stops in the 1930s, New York's history stops in the early 20th Century.  After establishing the state and noting its significance in the formation of our nation, the rest of the history tends to fall toward the individual cities and any type of political or demographic history would be included in those sections. Bhall87Four Scoreand Seven 01:56, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: History

message: What is the criteria? I can understand leaving companies like Wal-Mart off however other companies such as National Beef(Smithfield Foods) although it's companies headquarters is in Virginia has at least 5,000 employees in Kansas(most notably their Dodge City and Liberal Plants). Cargil operates an meat processor in Dodge City with 2700+ employees and in Garden City Tyson Foods operates a 3,000+ employee plant. Is the separation based on whether or not they are headquartered in the state? Source Link:http://www.acinet.org/acinet/oview6.asp?id=&soccode=&stfips=20&from=State&nodeid=12  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.151.39.31 (talk) 17:35, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The table simply reflects the data put out by the Kansas Chamber of Commerce in the data book that is linked in the table. I assume it is companies headquartered or with major offices in Kansas Ryan2845 (talk) 06:49, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Largest Employers 

message: This section is incomplete.  It should discuss the railroads with links to the AT&SF and other relevant articles.
4.249.63.20 (talk) 12:36, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transportation 

message: Why is the geography section before the history section? Shouldn't it be the other way around? Albacore (talk) 01:50, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, but someone else will have to fix it. I'm currently confined to editing from an iPod; I can't edit if the part to be changed is below the length of the edit window. Ks0stm (T•C•G) 05:57, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Grey Wanderer (talk) 09:45, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  History and Geography sections 

message: There is a newer license plate design now.Unclemikejb (talk) 03:16, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: License plate

message: Probably better just to link  to List of people from Kansas rather than have that very long list of people from Kansas. Same goes for the "Landmarks" section. Major change, thought I should bring it up here first. Albacore (talk) 22:55, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. AlexiusHoratius 00:05, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good. Grey Wanderer (talk) 00:09, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Done, thanks. Albacore (talk) 14:40, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable residents 

message: The few pictures on this article enforce the stereotype that the Kansas countryside is boring and flat. I request a couple more pictures c: --Τασουλα (Shalom!) (talk) 22:54, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures. 

message: "In 1996, when Kansas Republican Senator Bob Dole failed in his bid to become President on the party's national ticket, the state became the second in the nation (following Minnesota and preceding Arizona by identical twelve-year intervals) to produce two losing major-party presidential candidates, and the first in which the said candidates ran on the GOP ticket (following Alfred Landon's loss to FDR in 1936)."
I'm not sure what this editor is trying to say, but as it appears, it is false. Several states have produced multiple election losers for major parties. I'm going to remove it from the article but keep it on the talk page in case he or she wants to revise it. Gtbob12 (talk) 18:12, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Presidential election losers 

message: Just reading through the wiki for my home state and I noticed that there was no mention of the Cimmaron National Grasslands under parks and historic sites.  Not much of a park in the traditional sense, but still might deserve a mention.  Also no mention of the "Dust Bowl" days of Southwest KS.  Lots of interesting history from that area.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.103.80.122 (talk) 23:47, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The list of parks and historic sites are areas currently under the protection of the National Park Service which the Cimarron National Grassland is not. As for the Dust Bowl, it is covered a little bit in the History of Kansas article but could be expanded with info from the Dust Bowl article but even that focuses more on Oklahoma and Texas since those places were hit a lot harder. If someone from the WikiProject Kansas team had some info to add about the Dust Bowl/Great Depression in Kansas, it would definitely be welcome. Bhall87Four Scoreand Seven 01:12, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cimmaron National Grasslands? 

message: http://mgmbill.org/statistics.htm
Kansas 75% circumcision rate (2012) Still Medicaid funded  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.46.105.20 (talk) 15:54, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: What is the purpose of this? Are you asking for it to be in the article? It seems like just an arbitrary stat, not really significant for the article. Scarlettail (talk) 16:34, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Circumcision Statistics  

message: I just created a redirect from Brownbackistan to here. This article should discuss the use of the term in popular culture and how the image of Kansas in popular culture is often compared to an oppressive, third-world religious dictatorship. Viriditas (talk) 10:34, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  New redirect 

message: Information to be added or removed: I propose adding the below text in quotes to the education section of the page:
"Kansas ranked 24th in the nation for educational performance, according to Education Week’s Quality Counts 2018 report. It earned an overall score of 74.6 out of 100 points and a grade of C. By comparison, the nation received a score of 75.2 or a C.
Kansas posted a B-minus in the Chance-for-Success category, ranking 17th on factors that contribute to a person’s success both within and outside the K-12 education system. Kansas received a mark of C and finished 25th for School Finance. It ranked 33rd with a grade of D-plus on the K-12 Achievement Index." 
Explanation of issue: I believe this text would enhance the page, adding information on the quality of the state's K-12 education which is not currently available on the page. I'm asking your consideration because I work for Education Week. I apologize if I've misformatted this or left out information you need to make a decision - I'm rather new at this.
References supporting change: this is the source I'd cite: 
Csmithepe (talk) 17:55, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some proposed changes 

message: *Please provide a source unconnected to Education Week for this claim.
Regards,  Spintendo  21:07, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Reply 11-FEB-2019

message: "Kansas was first settled by Americans in 1827"--lead, para 2. This might come as a surprise to the Kansa Natives, who were non-nomadic and quite settled by 1827. Sure, we all know what is meant, but an encyclopedia should be held to a higher standard of accuracy. "European Americans", perhaps, although I'm not quite comfortable with that either. And "in" 1827? All in one year! I think the whole sentence needs recasting--what is actualy meant? I don't have a good answer; perhaps a real historian can clarify. --D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 18:52, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Settled by Americans? 

message: A request has been submitted to WikiProject Kansas for a new article to be created on the topic of Housing in Kansas. Please join the discussion or consider contributing to the new article. Best regards, -- M2545 (talk) 16:43, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Notification: [[Housing in Kansas]]

message: Shouldn't the official name of Kansas be the "State of Kansas"?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.197.134.44 (talk) 18:13, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  State of Kansas? 

message: There is discrepancy between rank ( as per population ) mention in Lead section & in the Infobox. In Lead it is mentioned  as 34th & in  Infobox it is 35th.Saankav (talk) 11:18, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rank as per population