Talk:Upland South

message: Has anyone making these comments spent anytime either (1) living in, or, (2) studying the southern regions of Ohio and Indiana and the southwestern portion of Pennsylvania? These are clearly and obviously part of Appalachia and has incredible southern influence.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.209.192.18 (talk) 00:39, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.. it's part of why I prefer the term Upland to Upper, although even the term Upper South ought to include Kentucky.  A problem with defining region by state lines is, I think, that it tends to come down to state politics at some point in the past.  Sometimes the Midwest is still defined by the terms of the Ordinance of 1798.  So yea, I agree, although I also think it could be nice to have a state map of the Upper South, even if it is impossible not to do it without controversy.  It's funny you mentioned Missouri as being Midwestern rather than Upper South, as the parts of Missouri I've been through (the southern parts, Ozarks) felt as Southern as the parts of Kentucky I've been through.  Missouri certainly felt different from Kansas at least.  In any case, I agree that the states most fully in the Upper/Upland South should be Tennessee and Kentucky, at least. Pfly 20:53, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

text: to define anywheres southerness (or any attribute for that matter) you cant just go by state lines, gotta break it down into counties and even past that into, towns, neighborhoods and land plots. i know for example neighborhoods,towns even individual roads or streets that has quite a southerness to it thats surrounded by many yankee settlements nearby.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.66.158.204 (talk) 02:11, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

text: Nice climate map. Pretty spot on. Chic3z (talk) 19:04, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Second image

message: Since the article discusses the Upper South in addition to Upland South, anyone fancy knocking up an image of the United States highlighting Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Arkansas in a deep colour, and Kentucky, Missouri, West Virginia and Maryland in a lighter shade of the same colour, to illustrate the politically defined "Upper South"?. GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 19:36, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.. it's part of why I prefer the term Upland to Upper, although even the term Upper South ought to include Kentucky.  A problem with defining region by state lines is, I think, that it tends to come down to state politics at some point in the past.  Sometimes the Midwest is still defined by the terms of the Ordinance of 1798.  So yea, I agree, although I also think it could be nice to have a state map of the Upper South, even if it is impossible not to do it without controversy.  It's funny you mentioned Missouri as being Midwestern rather than Upper South, as the parts of Missouri I've been through (the southern parts, Ozarks) felt as Southern as the parts of Kentucky I've been through.  Missouri certainly felt different from Kansas at least.  In any case, I agree that the states most fully in the Upper/Upland South should be Tennessee and Kentucky, at least. Pfly 20:53, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

text: to define anywheres southerness (or any attribute for that matter) you cant just go by state lines, gotta break it down into counties and even past that into, towns, neighborhoods and land plots. i know for example neighborhoods,towns even individual roads or streets that has quite a southerness to it thats surrounded by many yankee settlements nearby.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.66.158.204 (talk) 02:11, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

text: Nice climate map. Pretty spot on. Chic3z (talk) 19:04, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Upper South/Upland South

message: Seeing the "citation needed" added to the map of the Upper South, I added two references. The online reference has info about "states that did not secede during the Civil War until after the Battle of Fort Sumter", but is limited to CSA states only (Kentucky and Missouri left out). I added to reference to Meinig's book, which has tons of information about the Upland/Upper South, with both Kentucky and Missouri definitely part of it originally, and Missouri becoming increasingly identified as a Midwestern state in more recent times. The same user, anonymous 74.128.200.135, added another "citation needed" to the map, even though there are two references already in the caption. The edit summary says "source does not make specific reference to states that are apart of this region". Nothing was posted on this talk page or on my talk page. I don't understand the edit summary -- both references do specific references states, especially the book, which is full of info about the region.
Am I missing something?  Perhaps anon user 74.128.200.135 could reply here with something more specific?  I posted a note to User talk:74.128.200.135 about it.  I'd be happy to supply a reference for whatever it is that still needs one, just tell me what it is.  Region maps based on states can be controversial, as I mentioned above.  If the map is unacceptably controversial, let's just remove it. Pfly 02:18, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah ok, gotchya, thanks. I reworded the caption of the map of the Upper South to clarify that it is based only on a specific historical issue, which is also explained in more detail in the main article's text -- that it is just a map of those "slave states" that did not secede until after Fort Sumter (and counting Kentucky and Missouri for their attempts to secede). Being so specific and historically based, the map doesn't contradict the Southern U.S. map, which is meant to be more general in scope, if I understand right. The caption here also mentions that this is just one definition among many -- it just happens to be one of the few that is specific enough to be mapped by state so easily. But I'm still not sure whether the map does more help than harm, and often consider removing it. For readers who don't read the full text, the map may give a false impression -- that these states are in fact the Upper South, when they are just one definition among many.  So... what do you think?  The caption could be clearer on these points.  We could not have a state-based map at all.  Personally, I don't care whether the map stays or goes -- not having it may be better.  But I'm reluctant to try to make a more general map using multiple tones, stripes, etc.  The non-state-based map on the page seems to already give readers a general sense of where the region is located. Pfly 03:42, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I'd rather see the page's content improved (it could use it!) rather than debates over whether a certain state is or isn't, or sort of is part of the region. This page already has a non-state-based map (which I think is more useful and accurate than a state-based map, fuzzy edges and all), and the text describes how states like Arkansas, for example, are "sort of" part of the region better than a striped-style map would (the Arkansas Ozarks are upland/upper, while the Arkansas Delta region is not -- a striped state would not show that). The political map is unnecessary since the text describes the region by state in detail, and there is a better map at the top of the page. Also the political map is misleading since it is based on Civil War era stuff. I made and added the political map, with some reluctance, unsure whether it would help or hurt -- I'm going to take it out now. I wouldn't mind a political map being here, but am afraid of the kind of endless debate that dominates pages like Talk:Midwestern United States, Talk:Southern United States, and Talk:Mid-Atlantic States. Perhaps someone can help with the content? The history section could really use more information about what happened between the early 1800s and today (a lot happened!). Pfly 17:58, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Have you read the article Upland South? Does it says that Kentucky is not part of the South? Before you condemn an article as the dumbest thing you've ever seen, it may help to read it first. Otherwise you may embarrass yourself. If reading is too much trouble, just look at the map and try to remember which state is Kentucky and which is Maryland. Pfly 06:29, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

text: If you think it's dumb that Maryland is a southern state, one can also argue that it's dumb not to label Kentucky as a mid-west state. If one is included, they both are included, period. 69.251.26.101 (talk) 06:27, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Citation needed for map

message: I thought I was the only one that noticed the Upland Southern influences here in Southwestern PA, it's interesting someone else did too as far as the map goes (and do they have a source for it though?) But I have to wonder if they're confusing Southern culture and Appalachian culture because there are minute differences in the two. Second officer 04:22, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Southwestern PA

message: There are Pennsylvania influences in the Upland South, not Upland Southern influences in Pennsylvania. Most of the Upland South was settled by Pennsylvanians, Virginians and Carolinians. The Pennsylvania influence and the relative dearth of slavery legacy are the two clearest differentiators between the Upland South and the Deep South. For that matter, Pennsylvania influence along the Great Wagon Road explains the cultural differences between the Shenandoah Valley and Tidewater regions of Virginia.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by DBR96A (talk • contribs) 19:34, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: You have it backwards

message: First of all, I think that this article is overall well-written and useful.  But the inclusion of any portion of Pennsylvania in any manner as part of the "upper South" - even shaded the same color as parts of Georgia (!!!) - is one of those major factual inaccuracies that occasionally surface on Wikipedia.  I think that the terms "Appalachian" and "upper South" are being uncomfortably interchanged in this article; much of the upper South is in Appalachia, but the two terms are not mutually inclusive.  If we are going to include every part of Appalachia as within the confines of the upper South, Upstate New York and points north might as well be included.  Southwestern Pennsylvania is indeed an Appalachian region; but to compare the history, social norms, and culture of Pittsburgh with those of distinctly Southern cities such as Knoxville, Tennessee or Pikeville, Kentucky is simply not accurate.  This can be factually verified with outside sources; besides, as a Pennsylvanian this is common sense to me.  The same almost certainly applies to Ohio as well, but I'm not qualified to speak regarding that state.  Parts of Ohio are Appalachian, but I've never heard a qualified person refer to Ohio as "Southern" in any context.
--65.222.20.131 (talk) 01:47, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The original map I made for this page, here, was edited to include more of SW PA by a user who seems to have left wikipedia some time ago. My map ends more clearly at the PA line, more or less. The points about Appalachia, Ohio, etc, are reasonable. But as far as I can see there's no firm universally agreed upon definition. My map is generally based on similar maps and descriptions of the Upland South in Meinig's books cited. Pfly (talk) 02:03, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Pennsylvania in the upper South? Really? 

message: Northern West Virginia is historically and culturally more similar to western Pennsylvania than it is to southern West Virginia. It has a much stronger industrial legacy and ethnic European heritage than southern West Virginia does, and there was virtually no support for slavery there. In fact, you have to be south of U.S. Route 50 to even possibly be in the Upland South. Along and north of there, you're in the North, period.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by DBR96A (talk • contribs) 19:46, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: I wouldn't even include northern West Virginia in the Upland South, for that matter

message: I think this article should be split; Upper South and Upland South are two completely different concepts. Redirecting Upper South (a state-based political grouping that includes all of NC and Virginia) to Upland South (a terrain-based cultural grouping that excludes the Virginia Tidewater and most of NC) just makes for one hopelessly confused article where there could be two simple ones. There's no such confusion present in the Deep South article. CarolinianJeff (talk) 20:33, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur and have added the appropriate tag so as to gather feedback. -- Kendrick7talk 00:48, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I arrived here from Plantations in the American South via the the current wording "Tobacco was the major cash crop in the Upper South, the original Chesapeake Bay Colonies of Virginia and Maryland; and in parts of the Carolinas." This article doesn't cover that concept of the "Upper South". There's another concept in play with the "Upper South" redirect. Marksville, Louisiana currently links via "one million [slaves] were transported to the Deep South from the Upper South in the first half of the 19th century". Algonquian peoples is another article with a link to Upper South that isn't appropriate for this article. Incoming links to Upper South need to be examined and disambiguated, but there is certainly a need for an article that covers an area northeast of the Applachians (the Upper South as opposed to the Deep South). Plantdrew (talk) 05:47, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Upper South vs. Upland South

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Upland South. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100305000208/http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2007/Online_Highlights/Ag_Atlas_Maps/Crops_and_Plants/Field_Crops_Harvested/07-M191.asp to http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2007/Online_Highlights/Ag_Atlas_Maps/Crops_and_Plants/Field_Crops_Harvested/07-M191.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100305214454/http://www.valpo.edu/geomet/pics/geo200/culture/ancestry.gif to http://www.valpo.edu/geomet/pics/geo200/culture/ancestry.gif
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100522053048/http://www.valpo.edu/geomet/pics/geo200/religion/baptist.gif to http://www.valpo.edu/geomet/pics/geo200/religion/baptist.gif
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:29, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I think the Upland South in North Carolina is really southern and not Upstate Raleigh so it's going to be really hard to make me Monterey again since we are the Upland South. --I Have Always Been a Twin (talk) 15:16, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  What do I think of the Totally Teenage Twins? 

message: The “as a cultural region” section is badly written, starting by asserting cultural differences across a range of specified areas but then either failing to provide any detail or asserting (as for example with cuisine) that there aren’t really any differences.  Someone familiar with the sources could usefully edit some sense into this? MapReader (talk) 00:21, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradictions 

message: I don't understand how Western Maryland is included in the "Upland South" here yet places like Southern Maryland, the Eastern Shore, and Slower Lower Delaware aren't included.--DruidLantern8 (talk) 14:04, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the map based on real sources or is it conjecture? 

message: By definition "upland South" cannot be west of the Mississippi River (hardly "upland"). I also question whether you can call the Ohio River valley the upland South. Did it have the same culture? Citation please. 
In other words, Oklahoma, Missouri, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, the west of Kentucky and Tennessee, and most of Alabama except a little NE corner, are not part of the Upland South, or Upper South either, abd should not be colored. If I knew how I'd fix it myself, buf I don't. deisenbe (talk) 12:05, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map is inaccurate