|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the American frontier article.|
|American frontier has been listed as a level-4 vital article in History. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as B-Class.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
- 1 WikiProject Wild West
- 2 Number of sources?
- 3 Old talk
- 4 History vs Fiction
- 5 Railroads
- 6 Article historical reference
- 7 Early explorers and trappers: Section Notes
- 8 Map
- 9 Kurosawa
- 10 Not encyclopedic at all
- 11 Name
- 12 Sentence in intro
- 13 Old West
- 14 Clarification requested
- 15 Proposal to improve article
- 16 Featured?
- 17 Native American Chiefs 1865 photo
- 18 Real cowboys only shed one tear?
- 19 Everyday life on the frontier
- 20 Bias on Oklahoma land
- 21 Article far too long
- 22 Name
- 23 Old West vs American Frontier
- 24 The myth of the Wild West
- 25 1700-1910
- 26 Jedediah Strong Smith
- 27 Louis and Clark expedition
- 28 Native Americans
- 29 Ulysses S. Grant's peace policy
- 30 The intro is not written in an encyclopedic style
- 31 Correct or delete unreliable maps.
WikiProject Wild West
- The new link is at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#American Old West. Chris 04:07, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Number of sources?
I agree with Lightpath... the vast majority of the footnotes point back to the DK Story of the West. Certainly there have been other ideas from landmark books about this topic from the 20th century that could and should be included to broaden the scope of this (understandably) far-reaching article —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 20:04, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
I am not happy with this language, "...before the coming of the railroads. After the railroads, emigration to the West became much easier; but before the railroads, rule by the gun was the norm,..." Most areas of the West were relatively peaceful with established authority before the coming of the railroad, not "rule of the gun". Conversely certain areas, for example, Arizona and Wyoming were relatively lawless after the coming of the railroad, see Johnson County War. Fred Bauder 12:40, Sep 7, 2004 (UTC)
I'm inclined to agree, the language is a bit over-wrought and of dubious accuracy. Much of the "Old West" was really rather dull.
dino 17:55, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
"Considerable poetic license has been taken with a number of the actual events and characters such as Wyatt Earp and Billy the Kid as they have been protrayed in ways which reflect contemporary concerns more than the historical record."
Contemporary concern? Isn't it rather derived from the romanticism of that era?
"Nevertheless, the untamable mystique of the Wild West lives on... A fascination with a simpler world of salt of the Earth values, where men were men and women were damsels, fuels interest in Nashville and the Country Music scene, the rodeo circuits and the Western fashions of the 21st Century. Is it any surprise that Cowboy Action Shooting is one of the fastest growing sports today, combining marksmanship with the theatricality of an historical reenacting of the gunslinging Wild West days? The interest in the West seems eternal: maybe it is just because "a man's got to do what a man's got to do.""
This paragraph seems more like its been written for a magazine than for an enclylopedia.
I don't know who wrote it, but it does sound like a bad in-flight magazine. I edited it, and hopefully it is better.
dino 04:47, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I'm curious should the time range of the west be more around 1849 following the California Gold Rush ? With much of the west coast settled by 1860 it could even be argued following the period after the Lewis and Clark Expedition leading to the colonization of Oregon and California. I would suggest a timeline more along the lines of around 1850 to 1890. Maybe a rewording "from 1850 to its official close in 1890 (however the settling of the west continued into the early 1900s)." ? 220.127.116.11 19:40, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The concept of the frontier and of the old west are easily confabulated. I would date the old west from the Texas Revolution in 1836 and subsequent settlement of Texas. I think the days of the Mountain Men and of Bent's Fort and the Santa Fe Trail, which also predates 1849, fit easily into the period. Fred Bauder July 8, 2005 12:56 (UTC)
- I agree. I think the Santa Fe Trail and the Battle of the Battle of the Alamo would fit most people's idea of the Old West and the timeline given should include those events. Johntex 23:04, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
- Sorry for my late responce. As you can see I left the previous message quite awhile ago. Certainly the "Old West" could be traced back to the Louisianna Purchase. It seems the general timeline might be divided into diffrent "eras" in the phases of western settlement. 18.104.22.168 09:02, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
- Exploration (from the Louis and Clark Expedition and subsequent explorations)
- Early Immigration (the initial colonization of Oregon, California, Texas, etc.)
- Pre-Civil War (from the California Gold Rush to the end of the Civil War)
- Post-Civil War (the end of the civil war through reconstruction and covering much of the romantizized "Old West")
- Final Years (the frontiers decline and eventual closing in 1890)
- Present Day (covering years following the "official" closing of the frontier to the present day)
History vs Fiction
The title of the article is American Old West and the first sentence of the article says "The Western United States has played a significant role in history and fiction." However, the article as it stands is mostly about history. Even the 'actual events and characters' section mentions "history and folklore". Should we:
- (a) Strive for more like a 50/50 balance
- (b) Take out the mention of history and focus on mythology, symbolism, and folklore
- (c) Continue on with no major change in the slant of the article?
I would be in favor of (a) with the provision I think the article will eventually get too big and require some sort of splitting. If we go with (b), we might consider renaming the article. Johntex 23:00, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
- I want to say we should do A. But in my mind, we should have a mention of how the present idea of the west was formed because of movies and media sources like Buffalo Bill's Wild West show. I have to find some old papers and sources, but one popular myth that came out of that show was that the myth that all indians wore feathers. In realality, a small group of indians, which happened to be working for Buffalo Bill wore them. --ZeWrestler Talk 12:29, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
I don't mind the fiction .... but it is now 75% fiction - 25% non-fiction. A time line and other historical facts should be put in to boost parity. Sincerely, JDR
I guess I struggle with the fiction element. The Old West aricle seems more of a product of Buffalo Bill and his show, and publicity stunts like the poney express (which was all about promoting the telegraph programme). Why not have one article about the romantic fictional West that was created and commodified by the likes of Buffalo Bill and John Ford, and a genuine article attempting to explain what it was really like. Cowboys were seen as idiots and criminals, not romantic rangers of the frontier, by all reliable accounts of the time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 22:52, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
The info on the railraods @ the close of the west is lacking. I'll try to put it in some times if someone doesn't beat me to it. JDR 20:27, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
Article historical reference
The article was mostly compose of other wikipedia articles. Is there a problem with that? .... go look @ the wlnk article here @ wikipedia. JDR 22:46, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
- I don't believe there is such a thing as the "Frontier Strip" but the Old West definitely also included the states west of the states so identified. Is it okay to go ahead and try to fix things like that or does a collaboration need some kind of vote. Also, IMHO, this article should be mainly historical with most of the fiction referred to Western fiction. HombreX 07:09, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
Early explorers and trappers: Section Notes
The "Early explorers and trappers" section needs to be expanded to include mentions of the expeditions of General William Henry Ashley and his partner, Major Andrew Henry. They were also involved in the fur trade/fur business. One of the men already mentioned in that section, Mike Fink (also a fur trapper), supposedly attended one or more of Ashley's expeditions and died on one of them. That would be a good way to tie them together.
One good reference I have found so far is 
It would be useful to add a map showing the historic area that was considered 'The West', prior and during the period of settlement. The map at Western United States shows the current West, but a similar one showing the 'Old West' would be of interest to non-American readers. --MichaelMaggs 21:21, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
That map is a joke. Is it actually insinuating that West Texas (or Texas period) is somehow "less" of the Old West somehow?! Also, these territories shown on the map did not even exist during the time period we now call the Old West. It's articles like this one that have earned Wikipedia a (growing) reputation as an unreliable (even laughable) source of information. --Nikoz78 (talk) 14:41, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
"It is a common misconception that Akira Kurosawa's film Yojimbo was influenced by certain spaghetti westerns, though quite the reverse is true."
He may not have been influenced by spaghetti westerns, but he definitely was influenced by westerns: he cites John Ford as his primary inspiration. 126.96.36.199 01:47, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Not encyclopedic at all
As an example:
"While James did harass railroad and corporate executives who unjustly seized private land or squashed small business for the railways and big business, modern biographers tend to stress that he did so for personal gain; forgetting that he and individuals like him were made outlaws by acts of Congress, Reconstruction, and powerful business interests."
Sorry, this last clause is just over the top with non-NPOV. The entire article looks like it was written by somebody trying desperately to inexplicably restore the romanticized version of Western American history. This really needs to be completely re-written by somebody without an agenda.
I agree, this entire article is rife with comments that seem to be trying to make the article relatable to a twelve year-old. The line "When outlaw gangs were near, towns would raise a posse (like in the movies)..." is a good example. "Like in the movies" provides no relevent information (people rode horses in the movies too, are we going to add that into every article mentioning equestrians?), and is representative of the unencyclopedic tone that strives to use the name "Wyatt Earp" in place of "lawman" every chance it gets. Unless someone has a valid reason to preserve this tone (liking cowboy movies is not a valid reason, this is about the Old West, not the Western film genre) I'm going to revise it a bit. The Cap'n (talk) 18:03, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Was there a French Old West or something? None of the interlanguage links even use "American" in the title of their articles, and that usage certainly isn't popular. Is the term needed? Zeality 04:30, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
- Since Old West redirects to American Old West, I don't think the "American" needs to be in there. 188.8.131.52 14:00, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Sentence in intro
- Though the Old West is often seen as being unusually violent, some argue that the Old West was "a far more civilized, more peaceful and safer place than American society today."
Any objections to removing this sentence? While that statement is sourced, I do not see any of its ideas built upon in the body of the article. Either the concept needs to be developed in the article in a non-trivial way, or the sentence should be removed. --Bletch 11:44, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
- I've removed this sentence. --Bletch 13:03, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
Even though most Americans may associate the term "Old West" with the post-civil war period, I suggest that a more coherent historical tale could be told by beginning it with the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 or earlier, and it probably should be earlier. There was really ONE frontier movement with different phases over more than a century, after all. I got to this article through other articles using the term "Old West" to refer to the earlier trans-Allegheny migrations and was disappointed to find that it begins with "cowboys and Indians." Much of the info presented here could be better told in an article titled "Wild West" or something similar. As it is, this article is not consistent with usage of the term "Old West" in historical literature, or in other Wikipedia articles. Amity150 00:28, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
- Most often the term refers to the late 19th century, between the American Civil War and the 1890 closing of the frontier.
I've been racking my brains, but I can't figure out what "closing of the frontier" might mean. For the benefit of people like me, could anyone explain? (In the article, I mean, not here!) Matt 00:14, 1 March 2008 (UTC).
Proposal to improve article
If no one objects, I am going to make a major revision of this article. I will concentrate on just history 1800-1900, with reliable citations, and remove cultural influences which better belong in article Western (genre), which also needs work but has a good start and good links to detailed articles. Scotwriter 00:45, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Native American Chiefs 1865 photo
I don't know if it matters for the sake of the article, but I'm a historian who has researched and written my share about Ponca Indians, and I can guarantee that this photo in the article is a photo of Ponca Indian leaders. The gentleman sitting in the middle was the the paramount chief of that time, White Eagle. The gentleman sitting at the far left is the famous Ponca Standing Bear. Others in the photo are also easily identifiable; I'd be glad to do so. Or if people feel best to just leave it labeled "Native American Chiefs," I suppose that's ok, too, but specificity is never a bad thing. Also, I'm not absolutely certain just by looking at it, but unless someone has a way to verify the date, I would also question the 1865 date of the photo and for various reasons would probably place it roughly ten years later, for what it's worth. Harry Yelreh (talk) 16:42, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
Real cowboys only shed one tear?
From the top photo caption on the page: "It is a well known fact that real cowboys will only shed one tear at any given time, giving them the perception of being 'real' men." Is that supposed to be a joke? I'm removing it. RS (talk) 07:50, 18 May 2010 (UTC) RS
Everyday life on the frontier
I came to this article looking for some information about everyday life on the frontier for an "average" frontier family, if such a thing can be imagined... the Life on the Frontier section seems to be missing this information. Is there another article I could check, and maybe add some information from? Or does someone with access to sources add some information? Emika22 (talk) 08:08, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
Bias on Oklahoma land
The statement In 1889, President Benjamin Harrison authorized the opening of 2,000,000 acres (8,100 km2) of unoccupied lands in the Oklahoma territory acquired from the native tribes. is not NPOV in that it neglects the viewpoint of the tribes who occupied the land and for the most part consider that the land was stolen by force rather than the neutral term acquired. Xj (talk) 20:19, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
Article far too long
This article is over 100kb. Per WP:Size the article should be cut substantially. I would suggest that multiple splits should be carried out and the text in various sections reduced to briefer summaries with pointers to the main articles in question. It may be painful, particularly for enthusiast of the period, but currently this is more like a short book than an encyclopedia article. Revcasy (talk) 17:50, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
- I dont think its too long. I would object to splitting up because its easer for the reader/researcher to have all the info on one page than having to find it spread out over several different ones.--184.108.40.206 (talk) 04:30, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
I know this was brought up before but that was in 2007. I have read alot about the Old West and only on wiki have I ever heard of it being referred to as the "American Old West." Every other history I have read about the Old West does not include the word "American" in it. This article should be renamed simply "Old West" as that is far more common than any other phrase used to describe the period.--$1LENCE D00600D (talk) 04:32, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
Old West vs American Frontier
It seems that on wiki many have confused the Old West as being another name for the American Frontier. The Old West was only a part of the frontier period and continued after the frontier "closed". Basically the American Frontier referred to the unsettled areas west of the British colonies on the East Coast] to the present day border with California. (California was not considered part of the frontier). There should be an article about the American frontier which can be used for the entire history of the frontier (1600s to circa 1890) while this artcle can remain as it is, an article about a specific period in the American frontier history (circa 1830 to circa 1920).--$1LENCE D00600D (talk) 04:43, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
The myth of the Wild West
- Let me be more clear. There were plenty of gunfights and gunfighters in the Old West, its just there werent as many like you see in Hollywood movies and the shootous or battles with Indians were, in general, not as bloody as Holloywood depicts. Basically, Hollywood over exaggerates or sacrifices truth for entertainment purposes. I'm sure you already know this but Hollywood does that to a lot of movies, not just ones about the Old West.--$1LENCE D00600D (talk) 09:35, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
I will be reverting the edit to the date (year) concerning the beginning of the Old West period. The Old West refers to the history of the Western United States (West of the Mississippi River) from about 1820 or 1830 to about 1910 or 1920. (Many western towns were founded after 1900, mainly due to gold and land rushes, but they were abandoned after a relatively short time.) Frontier history of the Eastern United States (including the Old Northwest) has always been considered seperate (or, at least, distict from the Old West). American frontier history of the East begins about 1600, with the founding of the eastern colonies, such as Jamestown Colony in Virginia and the Massachusetts Bay Colony. It ended just after the War of 1812, when the last major Indian tribes in the Old Northwest were defeated, and when the Southern Eastern Indians were removed west of the Mississippi. American migration west of the Mississippi then began to really pick up (before it was mainly mountain men and or fur trappers). First Americans went to Texas, then to Oregon, then to California and then to Alaska (settling the in between places along the way). Moreover, the Old West is known as the era of American cowboys and cattle drives (which didn't exist before the 1820s, and originate in Texas), gunfighters, outlaws and the final half of the American Indian Wars (anyone who reads this, should see the Indian wars article). The Old West was basically the last half of American frontier history. There are other reasons as well that I can think of, mainly technological advances and culture, but I hope you (whoever reads this) get my point. I will also use this time to suggest, again, that we need a new article called "American frontier" that focuses on all American frontier history as a whole (circa 1600 to circa 1920), rather than trying to pass off Old Eastern frontier history as that of the West. Obviously, this article would be the main article for information regarding Western frontier history and the new article that I propose can focus on frontier history of the East, with a limited amount of info about the West. I'd create the article myself but I'm already working on countless other projects and appreciate how much of an undertaking it would be to create an article like I have suggested.--$1LENCE D00600D (talk) 23:22, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
I wanted to be more clear, I have read alot about frontier history, and have always been particularly interested in the differences between frontier life in the East, as opposed to the way it was later on, in the West. For one, the Eastern Indians were not "Horse Indians," meaning they didnt use horses like the tribes west of the Mississippi (The Plains Indians and the Far Western tribes). Also, the personification of the Old West is a cowboy, or gunfighter, while the mountain men, or fur trappers (like Davy Crocket and Daniel Boone), is that of the East.
The three major things that mark the beginning of the Old West are as follows: 1) Texas: The initial settling of Texas by Americans and the subsequent Texas Revolution (1835) and the Mexican-American War (1846-1848), which brought Texas and a vast amount of other new territory under American control.), 2) The final destruction of the Eastern Indians (the Southern tribes) and their removal west of the Mississippi beginning in 1830 (At that time, the Mississippi River was pretty much the divider between the Western wilderness and the settled East, which is why the Indians were moved west of the river. The wars against the Southern Indians weren't part of the Old West but their removal west was.), 3) The Oregon Trail, which didn't become a major route until the 1830s.
The Louisiana Purchase was obviously huge but the settlement of such vast new territories didn't even begin until after the War of 1812. (The city of New Orleans existed but that was about it.) I saw recently that somebody had edited the box by changing the starting date of the Old West to 1804, probably because of the Louisiana Purchase and the Lewis and Clark Expedition. But, like I wrote above, the actual settlement didnt begin until well after the War of 1812 (1812-1815). I was going to say something then but I did not. However, when I looked at this article today, I saw that someone had changed the date all the way down to the year 1700. So that is why I am doing this now.
There are also several technological advancements that are important in defining the Old West. The Old West is often called the "Age of the Cowboy" or the "Age of the Gunman" (Or similar things) Cowboys and gunfighters really only came about after the invention of percussion cap revolvers (and other modern weapons) in the 1830s. Also, cowboys themselves originate in Texas, where American settlers began working with Spanish/Mexican cattle (and, as stated above, the American settlement of Texas didnt begin until the 1820s and 1830s). Trains are also an important part of the Old West and railroading in the United States began back East, in the 1820s, but gradually spread west along with the immigrants.
Anyone who knows anything about historical periods knows that they often slightly overlap one another. For example, the general conception is that the Old West centers around the last half of the 19th century (after the American Civil War [1861-65] and before 1900) but anybody who is really familiar with the subject knows that the events that made the Old West famous began occurring before the generally accepted beginning date (1865) and continued into the first two decades of the 1900s. Also, nowhere in any history book does it say that fighting on the western frontier during the War of 1812 was part of the Wild West. Nowhere in any history book does it say that fighting on the western frontier during the American Revolution was part of the Old West. This is because it wasn't, not by any means. Sure there were similarities between the "Old East" (as I like to call it) and the Old West, but they were still very different from one another.
Generally, when I think of the Old West, I'm thinking of Western United States history no sooner than 1820 and no later than 1920. However, c. 1830 to 1910 is probably more correct.--$1LENCE D00600D (talk) 09:30, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
Instead of proposing the creation of a new article for American frontier history as a whole, I think now that it wouldn't be a bad idea to simply make this article the new "American frontier" article (by renaming it). That way we can just have all the frontier history in one article, and make it clear at the top that the Old West generally refers to frontier history in the Western United States in a certain period of time (the last period). I really think that is the best idea, considering there is already a bunch of info here about frontier history east of the Mississippi. Also, if this is done, the starting and end dates should be "c. 1600 - 1900." I have no problem starting the process now but I will wait a couple days to see if anybody reads and responds to this.--$1LENCE D00600D (talk) 09:30, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
Davy Crocket and Mexico
I wanted to say a little bit more about Davy Crocket, and Spanish colonial/Mexican influence in the Western US. Crocket was your typical "Eastern" frontiersman, as I like to think of it, which just means that he was a frontiersman that was famous or active more so in the East than he was in the West. However, Crocket lived just at the time when Texas became the new frontier. So he went West and eventually died in the Alamo. Daniel Boone was an all "Eastern" frontiersman, who, if I remeber correctly, never went west of the Mississippi (if he did it wasn't very far).
California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas all share a very distinct culture and history from that of the other American states because they were all origionally part of the Spanish frontier/empire and the Spanish are the ones who first established European settlements in what we now call the border states. There is also significant Spanish influence in Florida and other parts of the Southern United States, however, Spanish influence in that area was never like that in the West, mostly because CA, AZ, NM and TX all became part of Mexico in 1821, when the Spanish colonists achieved independence from Spain. Its not just history though either. Because Texas shares a border with Mexico, like the other three border states, that makes it more of a Western state than a southern one like Florida. For one, the Mexican vaquero traditions, which the American cowboy derives from, didn't exist east of the Mississippi. The cowboy has always been purely Western (West of the Mississippi). Id also like to say that although the Old West begins in about 1830, the Old West periods of, for example, New Mexico or California didn't begin until during and after the process that brough them into the United States (the Mexican War 1846-48). They were still frontier territories (I dont mean US territories) beforehand but it wasn't the "Old West" or the "Wild West," which is solely an American idea of history. However, Mexico and even Canada do play important roles in Old West history. Another good example would be Alaska, which didnt become part of the US until 1867 (and even then it wasn't until the 1890s-1910s that American settlement began).
- In my opinion, the American frontier officially closed in 1912, when Arizona and New Mexico were admitted as states. --220.127.116.11 (talk) 04:52, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
Jedediah Strong Smith
Where is Jedediah Strong Smith the trail blazer who through private capital traveled during the 1820's throughout the West: Utah, California, and the Oregon Country? Cmguy777 (talk) 14:56, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- I believe Smith deserves his own section or more then just one sentence. Cmguy777 (talk) 14:59, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Louis and Clark expedition
I believe the Louis and Clark Expedition deserves a seperate segment. They really started Westward American exploration and trailblazing. More could be said on the Native American tribes that were living in the area during their explorations of the Old West. Cmguy777 (talk) 15:02, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Mentioning the Native American tribes in my opinion would balance the article. There seems to be an Anglo centric point of view in the article. The article apparently views Native Americans as non existant or insignifigant. Cmguy777 (talk) 15:07, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- There are two sections regarding Indians, although both are rather strange, one is centered around big battles, the other about location of casualties. How do you want the article to treat American Indians? User:Fred Bauder Talk 17:27, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- I suppose mainly that they were there would be best. Native Americans, those not hostile, offered trade, food, water, directions, and shelter to early American explorers such on the Louis and Clark Expedition and Jedediah Smith. Possibly a map that showed where the American Indian tribes were located during the 19th Century would be good. During the last half of the 19th Century the tribes were located in the Indian territories. Cmguy777 (talk) 20:44, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Perhaps we should say, "most Indians did not scalp any white travelers." ?? Indians are covered in a majority of the article's sections. The Indians are actually located in most western states even today. (Here in Billings Montana we have two large reservations within 50 miles). Rjensen (talk) 21:54, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- The article does cover Indians, however, I was referring to a map of the Indian nations or territories Early Indian Tribes, Culture Areas, and Linguistic Stocks: William C. Sturtevant, Smithsonian Institution, 1967. The map would help. Cmguy777 (talk) 04:32, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Ulysses S. Grant's peace policy
I believe President Ulysses S. Grant's peace policy deserves recognition. He reduced the amount of Indian Wars up until 1875 until gold was discovered in the Black Hills. He also hired a full Indian to run the Department of Indian Affairs. Also Grant's peace policy started Native Americans on their way to U.S. citizenship, having disbanded the treaty system. Any objections? Cmguy777 (talk) 02:30, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
Didn't Washington policy affect the American Frontier? For example, the Oregon Territory was jointly run by the British and America. Jedediah Strong Smith wrote to the Secretary of War that he believed the British were instigating the Indians against his American party. President Grant's peace policy set in motion the taming of the West, having desired the Indians to be incorporated into American society rather then be exterminated. Cmguy777 (talk) 05:43, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
- yes Washington is important. But that is covered in the presidential articles. Take Indians: every president had an Indian policy. Pouring all that detail in would drown the article. There was never an extermination policy re Indians. The question after 1800 was separation on reservations vs integration into the larger society--a problem still not resolved. Rjensen (talk) 06:07, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
I suppose Grant set Indian Policy on a different course with the goal of Indian assimilation into American society. During and after Grant the Indian Wars began a gradual overall decline. Yes, Native Americans are still not integrated into our society. I rarely see any Native Americans outside an Indian Casino. Cmguy777 (talk) 06:24, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
- The Peace Policy had more to do with who was in control of Indian affairs than anything else. Some of the civilization aspects came from Grant's idea that charitable or religious organizations were better-suited to manage Indian affairs. It also didn't "disband the treaty system." Considering that Crook made his name campaigning in Arizona during this period, and that the largest Indian war prior to the Great Sioux War (the Red River War) took place during this time, along with the Modoc War (which saw the only Regular Army general killed during the Indian Wars) I don't think the Peace Policy reduced conflict. You'd need some serious RS to back up that statement. Intothatdarkness (talk) 22:08, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
The intro is not written in an encyclopedic style
The intro is not written in an encyclopedic style. It sounds too romanticized, and doesn't do a good job summarizing the article.--Futuretrillionaire 20:37, 4 July 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Futuretrillionaire (talk • contribs)
Correct or delete unreliable maps.
I am no American or American historian but from my quick look at least the top three/four maps lack logical progression as far as titles go. Someone with more knowledge than this Aussie hopefully will either correct or delete.
Map one indicates "Colony of Louisiana (spain)".
Louisiana purchase article indicates that "The Louisiana Purchase (French: Vente de la Louisiane "Sale of Louisiana") was the acquisition by the United States of America in 1803 of 828,000 square miles (2,140,000 km2) of France's claim to the territory of Louisiana."
So, if I do understand well, a colony from New Spain, wearing a French King's traditional name (Louis...iana), had been acquired of France's claim blablabla blablabla ? In my sens, it takes a bit more of explanation or simply correct that map !
- It's a complicated story. France founded, settled and named Louisiana. In 1762 France turned it over to Spain. Spain sent government officials but not settlers. Back in Europe in 1800 Napoleon forced Spain to secretly give ownership back to France. France sold it to the US in Nov 1803. The US paid $$$ to France and Spain got zero. Spanish officials were in charge until 3 weeks before the sale to the US. US officials took control in March 1804. Rjensen (talk) 22:25, 28 September 2012 (UTC)