Category talk:Forts in Nebraska

	United States portal This category is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
	This category is supported by WikiProject American Old West.
	Nebraska portal This category is supported by WikiProject Nebraska.

Military history: Fortifications / North America / United States

This category is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	Fortifications task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Camp Kearny[edit]

it redirects to another place that had the name outside of Nebraska. Marine Corps Air Station Miramar. Don't have the texts in front of me to verify along with Fort Kearny there was a Camp Kearney in Nebraska. If so how can it be set up that it doesn't redirect to a place outside of nebraska when both use the name? a disambiguation of some sort? --Xiahou 00:56, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Military facilities cat[edit]

Not all of the facilities included in this category were military facilities; several were trading posts, Native American-built, pioneer-built or otherwise non-governmental. Using Category:Military facilities of the United States at this level is misleading. • Freechild'sup? 02:56, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I recognize that not all US forts were/are military facilities. I suppose an alternative is to place the military forts in both "Forts in state" and "Military facilities in state." --Scott Alter 17:57, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, that sounds like a feasible solution. I wonder if it is important to relate the two categories somehow, or if listing them under "Buildings and structures in state" is close enough? The only option I could think would be to allow "Forts in state" to be a general category, with "Military forts in state" listed as a subcat? I'm not sure. • Freechild'sup? 18:37, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it was important to relate the categories, which is why I added forts to military facilities. Creating a military forts as a sub category is a good idea. Then, it would be in both forts and military facilities. The only potential problem is that the new category would potentially be very small. --Scott Alter 18:57, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]