Talk:Red River of the South

Name

The current title uses 'watershed' in the disambig in a US-specific sense, which isn't ideal given the stance of the MOS on such things. What about "(Mississippi basin)", or "(Mississippi tributary)"? Alai (talk) 19:36, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

I think (Mississippi tributary) sounds best.Narthring (talk • contribs) 04:39, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Based on WP:RIVERS it ought to be Red River (Mississippi River). Kmusser (talk) 13:22, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

What about renaming the page "Red River of the South"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.55.180.51 (talk) 15:49, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Red River of the South? Very few people in the US even know there is another Red River. Why not call them Red River (Canada) and Red River (US). Don't make up names that no one uses. WCCasey (talk) 08:20, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

The northern one is commonly referred to as the Red River of the North, this one probably should be Red River (Mississippi River). Red River of the South is not its most common name. Kmusser (talk) 16:29, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Red River Compact

Maybe this would be a good place to explain the Red River Compact, associated commission, etc. [1] -- Beland (talk) 20:40, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Article classification

The quality of this article meets the requirements of C class. I have made this change for WP:Oklahoma. Bruin2 (talk) 15:57, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Red River of the North which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 23:44, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Red River of the South. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060329165243/http://texashistory.unt.edu/permalink/meta-pth-6105 to http://texashistory.unt.edu/permalink/meta-pth-6105
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121024013411/http://www.library.okstate.edu/okmaps/ to http://www.library.okstate.edu/okmaps/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:36, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Red River of the South. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100719220154/http://digital.library.okstate.edu/encyclopedia/entries/C/CA003.html to http://digital.library.okstate.edu/encyclopedia/entries/C/CA003.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:23, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 31 December 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. If someone wants to start a new RM for the alternative title, they can. TonyBallioni (talk) 23:27, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

---

Red River of the South → Red River (Mississippi River) – See #Name, above. LaundryPizza03 (talk) 21:23, 31 December 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. wbm1058 (talk) 02:48, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

History

• At 21:20, 6 June 2012‎ SilkTork moved page Red River (Mississippi River) to Red River of the South: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names)#Disambiguation - where this article title is given as an example of natural disambiguation over brackets:
  • When there are conventional means of disambiguation in standard English, use them, as in Red River of the North and Red River of the South, and in New York City (to distinguish from the state of New York).
    • Added to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names) guideline by Pmanderson on 4 February 2009.
    • At the time of the naming convention addition, this page was titled Red River (Mississippi watershed).
    • At 21:09, 16 December 2009‎ Kmusser moved Red River (Mississippi watershed) to Red River (Mississippi River): make title consistent with WP:RIVERS guidelines
      • See Wikipedia:WikiProject Rivers § Naming
    • At 04:20, 26 March 2007 Janitor moved Red River of the South to Red River (Mississippi watershed) over redirect: No such river as the Red River of the South in the US per United States Geological Survey
    • At 10:52, 23 March 2007 Ace Telephone moved page Red River (Mississippi watershed) to Red River of the South over redirect (America has two Red Rivers, and they should not be explained in parentheses.)
• Talk:Red River of the North#Requested move 8 October 2015: Not moved per consensus.

— Relisted. Please review the above before commenting. – wbm1058 (talk) 02:48, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

• Oppose – The linked 2008–2013 discussion is not a rationale for moving to an obsolete style. If the current name is not correct, we need to hear why, and if a new name is needed, it would likely be Red River (Atchafalaya River tributary). Dicklyon (talk) 02:51, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose - Mostly per Dicklyon, no rationale for renaming is given. Parenthetical disambiguation is Wikipedia's internal disambiguation method (WP:D), I wouldn't expect to see it outside Wikipedia, and Dickylon is correct in that WP:RIVERS has changed its guidelines, so if Red River of the South is rejected than Red River (Atchafalaya River tributary) would be the WP:RIVERS recommended replacement. Kmusser (talk) 15:32, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:

• "Red River of the South" is a term used by several reliable sources: Britannica, World Atlas, New Mexico Historical Review, Images of the Plains, Old Man River: The Mississippi River in North American History, American Expansionism, 1783-1860, etc. I'm not finding much with "Red River (Mississippi River)", except Wikipedia mirrors, though there is this. SilkTork (talk) 10:02, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
• Britannica actually makes this the primary topic for Red River, although they have a different system for disambiguation (the River in Asia shares the same title) – wbm1058 (talk) 13:23, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
  • https://www.britannica.com/place/Red-River Red River RIVER, UNITED STATES Alternative Title: Red River of the South
  • https://www.britannica.com/place/Red-River-Asia Red River RIVER, ASIA Alternative Titles: Song Hong, Yüan Chiang
  • https://www.britannica.com/place/Red-River-of-the-North Red River of the North RIVER, NORTH AMERICA Alternative Title: Red River

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Possible error

The version that ['allegedly'] contains an error

The comments below are based on (and hence they are about) the "07:02, 30 July 2019" version of the article, (which was the latest / most current / "up-to-date" version of the article when this "Talk:" page section was first created).

What it says now

In the second paragraph of the lede, it says:

The south bank of the Red River formed part of the US–Mexico border from the Adams–Onís Treaty (in force 1821) until the Texas Annexation and the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo.

and -- technically, at least -- that does not sound right to me.

What's wrong with that sentence?

[According to many reliable sources], in 1836 Texas -- (that is, what was then called "Texas") -- became an independent country (and it remained a separate country until it became a state of the US in 1845). (right?)

So, since Texas was no longer part of Mexico, at least some parts of that border there changed, in 1836, (from a US–Mexico border to a "US-Texas border").

So, therefore, the sentence quoted above (in the "What it says now" sub-section) should probably be re-worded! (right?)

Some possible solutions

One way of re-wording that sentence would be: [1]: change [the endpoint of] the time interval. (Maybe to about 1836 instead of [what it says now, which is, like ...] the mid- to late 1840s).

Another idea would be: [2]: say something like "formed part of the southern border of the US" instead of saying "formed part of the US–Mexico border".

Any comments?

There might be other ideas, not [yet] listed here.
Any comments? --Mike Schwartz (talk) 04:32, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Another option would be to list both Mexico and Texas, i.e. "formed part of the US–Mexico and US-Texas border from . . ." though I think your option #2 would be fine as well and just sidestep the matter. Kmusser (talk) 15:39, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Source coordinates seem incorrect

The source coordinates of 34°34′35″N 99°57′54″W seem incorrect.

As mapped on OpenStreetMap, the Red River begins at the confluence of the Prairie Dog Town Fork and the North Fork, and the coordinates are 34.3343, -99.2097.

I don't see anything notable at 34°34′35″N 99°57′54″W – it's just a nondescript point in the middle of the Prairie Dog Town Fork. 2601:281:D47F:B960:24BB:7969:EAD:8A83 (talk) 23:06, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Source

Article may need to be changed?

According to USGS, the Red River proper begins where Prairie Dog Town Fork meets the intermittent Buck Creek, half mile downstream of Oklahoma state line.

>U.S. Geological Survey, 1985, USGS 1:24000-scale Quadrangle for Hollis SW, OK 1985: U.S. Geological Survey.https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/5a8a481ee4b00f54eb3fad49

If accurate, article needs to be changed.

Fredlesaltique (talk) 09:12, 10 March 2024 (UTC)