Talk:Northwest Territory

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Northwestern University[edit]

For some reason there was a large amount of information in the introduction about Northwestern University. I deleted it as it is completely irrelevant. Mbarry829 (talk) 22:35, 16 March 2008 (UTC)


Is there any reason this article can't be at just plain Northwest Territory so long as it retains the note at the top about Canada's Northwestern Territories? jengod 07:56, Jan 28, 2004 (UTC)

Moved. I don't see the confusion since that one is plural and this one is singular. the note at the top is more than enough. --Jiang 07:58, 28 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Fixed chronology problem[edit]

The Constitutional convention was in 1787 and could not possibly have been the motivating factor for events in 1780. By the time of the convention, the Western lands issue had mostly been settled.

Roadrunner 14:59, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

That was a mistake in the original. It should have referred to the Articles of Confederation. Maryland held out on ratifying the articles until states had agreed to cede their claims to western territories. olderwiser 15:36, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Phantom categories are a menace[edit]

Near the top of the page, the following text appears:

Northwest Territory, 1787 Northwest Territory, 1803

Where the heck does that come from? I keep editing/searching the article, but I can't find it to either delete it or move it to the bottom of the article, where it belongs. Mingusboodle (talk) 05:01, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

I think these were caused by a recent edit that linked dates in the infobox. olderwiser 13:43, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing that! Mingusboodle (talk) 17:23, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

The same size as France[edit]

Reading this article, I notice that the Old Northwest is just about the same size as France, and propose adding a phrase to that effect. This should help people visualize it, especially people from outside North America.

Suggest ending the second paragraph: "The area covered more than 260,000 square miles (673,000 km²), the same size as France." (talk) 16:43, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


Lithuanian Northwest Territory[edit]

While there may or may not need to be disambiguation between Territory and Territories, it is needed to distinguished at least between the Northwest Territory in the USA and the Northwest Territory in the old Russian Empire (which included Lithuania). Uranian Institute (talk) 20:24, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

If there were a topic on "Northwest Territory in the old Russian Empire", it would be possible to add it to the list of disambiguation comments. Tedickey (talk) 21:16, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Russian Northwest Territory[edit]

According to the Encyclopedia Britannica entry for Lithuania, the term Northwest Territory was used not just for Lithuania but for a region within the Russian Empire that included Lithuania, "northwest" logically implying "Northwest Russian Empire". Wikipedia already includes an entry for "Northwestern Krai", a political entity created in the 18th century, and therefore probably Not the same as the "Northwest Territory" created after 1830 by the Russian Czarist government. Assuming the Encyclopedia Britannica as a credible source, this means a rather clear need to disambiguate at least between the US Northwest Territory and the Russian Northwest Territory -- even IF (and that is a big IF) the Russian Northwest Territory were identical to the "Northwestern Krai".... also it seems reasonable to me for people to include information published by reliable academic sources if such information is available in reliable academic sources. And also remember that Wikipedia is consulted by people all over the world who are reading material and references from around the globe. The disambiguation of "Northwest Territory" remains aside from the question of disambiguation with "Northwest Territories". Uranian Institute (talk) 21:54, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Either way, you don't have a topic containing the information, and encyclopedia topics are not a good basis for reliable sources - suggest that you find the sources and construct a topic before deciding how to rewrite other topics to promote that one Tedickey (talk) 22:11, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

You state "encyclopedia topics are not a good basis for reliable sources" -- what 'reliable' sources do you recommend instead?. (talk) 22:49, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Primary sources, of course. A good encyclopedia topic can point you there. Tedickey (talk) 23:06, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I was referring to the Encyclopedia Britannica... plus there are several other articles on the internet written by people with graduate degrees on the topic of the Russian Northwest Territory created as part of the 'Russification' policy of Czar Nicholas I... not to mention a revived 'Russification' policy by Czar Nicholas II. I added a Wiki article for "Northwest Territory (in Czarist Russia)" and it was removed shortly therafter by someone who apparently thinks is doesn't belong in Wikipedia for some strange reason. However, there is yet another reason to disambiguate the term "Northwest Territory"... several articles on American history on the internet indicate that after "Northwest Territory" ceased to be used for the region including Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, etc., that the term was revived and used to refer to what was also at one point called the 'Oregon Country' in the US Pacific Northwest, and included parts of the current states of Oregon and Idaho as well as adjacent regions. It seems to me that a specialist in American History might want to look into that and include it in Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an international source of information consulted by people around the world, and it seems reasonable to include all possible cross-references to disambiguate terminology. (talk) 00:51, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, the place to start is by creating those other interesting topics, and then add/update disambiguation templates (hat-notes) as appropriate Tedickey (talk) 10:13, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

promotional edits for Ohio University[edit] not improve this topic TEDickey (talk) 09:30, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Essentially the same text was added to two topics which improves neither, being at most a secondary connection with this topic. TEDickey (talk) 10:19, 17 October 2014 (UTC)