Jump to content

Talk:Esquimalt Royal Navy Dockyard

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Date?

[edit]

How did the British set up a base here in 1842 when the Oregon Treaty wasn't signed until 1846? Kevlar67 03:41, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Oregon Treaty antedates the British presence in the region by a good two decades, more like three; the base in question at what is now Victoria at the time would have been Fort Camosun, the precursor to Fort Victoria, which was established the subsequent year; same fort, new name, and it had just been started; it was chosen in anticipation of the Oregon Treaty's eventual settlement-as-it-is, partly because the anticipated boundary meant the loss of Fort Vancouver, the current British headquarters in the area, and partly to secure the British presence on Vancouver Island south of the 49th Parallel (or really in the Juan de Fuca-Georgia Strait period).Skookum1 05:03, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And I should add that at least a small Royal Navy presence was on-site from the foundation of Fort Victoria, and RN ships were posted to the area in the lead-up to the Treaty of Washington (the Oregon Treaty); it's not like there weren't British in the area before the Oregon Question came to head; it was Americans who weren't in the area, by comparison.Skookum1 06:40, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

It appears that each of these articles has a large "See also" section that has links to the other articles (and that replicates Category:Royal Navy bases in Canada and Category:Royal Navy dockyards in Canada). I am wondering if a navbox template might be more helpful in presenting the article links in a manner that is less cluttered (each article is currently a bit on the short side). Here is an example: 67.86.75.96 (talk) 17:22, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This one uses the {{Military navigation}} template: 67.86.75.96 (talk) 23:20, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was skeptical about the utility of the narrower Military navbox template until I saw how well it worked (via a Campaignbox) with an {{Infobox Military Conflict}} as in the USS Essex vs HMS Phoebe article, recently. Hence I may go with the latter at AFC, since most of the interlinked articles have a military infobox already. 67.86.75.96 (talk) 00:27, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The navbox was created and may be used in an article with {{Royal Navy in Canada}}. 67.86.75.96 (talk) 04:08, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Esquimalt Royal Navy Dockyard. 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:

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) 09:01, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Esquimalt Royal Navy Dockyard. 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:

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) 17:12, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Esquimalt_Royal_Navy_Dockyard&oldid=1207137812"