![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Please see RE BC & Pacific Northwest History Forum re: Talk:List of United States military history events#Border Commission troops in the Pacific Northwest. If you think maybe I should also move some or copy some of my other stuff from NW history and BC history pages and various Indigenous peoples project article/talk pages let me know; I never mean to blog, but I'm voluble and to me everything's interconnected; never meaning to dominate a page so have made this area to post my historical rambles on. Thoughts? Skookum1 03:49, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
In in-lined commented that because a citataion request would only garner a US-side cite saying that this was the case. It's not. From 1813 through Fort George was HBC ownership until its closure 1825-29, then reopened 1830-48 also under the HBC....how a place that was British-run for most of its existence was "the first permanent American settlement on the Northwest Coast" is a bit of a reach; part of US national/manifest destiny mythology I know, but untrue; I'll add some stuff later on the diplomatic upshot of the Raccoon's erstwhile seizure of the fort and how it played into US hands..... Skookum1 ( talk) 17:31, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
As should be obvious from the date in this article in reference to the Beaver compared to the launch date in the Beaver (steamship) (the HBC ship) and the fact that Beaver (steamship) was not linked in this article, these are not the same ships. Many ships have had the same name as other ships (see also HMS Beaver (F93)). Aboutmovies ( talk) 10:57, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
OK, I'm a bit confused as Fort George was among the properties of the NWC sold to the HBC in 1821....but there was a re-possession by the US in 1818 due to treaty complications arising from Capt. Black's importunate "seizure" of the already-British post in 1813. At what point did it revert to the NWC/Britain in time to become an HBC installation? Or was it a reposseession where the NWC stayed in charge;operational ownership? Skookum1 ( talk) 17:42, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
The lengthy quotes from early 20th c. historians are hard to read. They could be paraphrased and made more succinct.-- Parkwells ( talk) 20:32, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Fort Astoria. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:15, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Please see RE BC & Pacific Northwest History Forum re: Talk:List of United States military history events#Border Commission troops in the Pacific Northwest. If you think maybe I should also move some or copy some of my other stuff from NW history and BC history pages and various Indigenous peoples project article/talk pages let me know; I never mean to blog, but I'm voluble and to me everything's interconnected; never meaning to dominate a page so have made this area to post my historical rambles on. Thoughts? Skookum1 03:49, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
In in-lined commented that because a citataion request would only garner a US-side cite saying that this was the case. It's not. From 1813 through Fort George was HBC ownership until its closure 1825-29, then reopened 1830-48 also under the HBC....how a place that was British-run for most of its existence was "the first permanent American settlement on the Northwest Coast" is a bit of a reach; part of US national/manifest destiny mythology I know, but untrue; I'll add some stuff later on the diplomatic upshot of the Raccoon's erstwhile seizure of the fort and how it played into US hands..... Skookum1 ( talk) 17:31, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
As should be obvious from the date in this article in reference to the Beaver compared to the launch date in the Beaver (steamship) (the HBC ship) and the fact that Beaver (steamship) was not linked in this article, these are not the same ships. Many ships have had the same name as other ships (see also HMS Beaver (F93)). Aboutmovies ( talk) 10:57, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
OK, I'm a bit confused as Fort George was among the properties of the NWC sold to the HBC in 1821....but there was a re-possession by the US in 1818 due to treaty complications arising from Capt. Black's importunate "seizure" of the already-British post in 1813. At what point did it revert to the NWC/Britain in time to become an HBC installation? Or was it a reposseession where the NWC stayed in charge;operational ownership? Skookum1 ( talk) 17:42, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
The lengthy quotes from early 20th c. historians are hard to read. They could be paraphrased and made more succinct.-- Parkwells ( talk) 20:32, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Fort Astoria. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:15, 20 December 2017 (UTC)