Talk:Camp Warner
Latest comment: 9 years ago by Euonyman in topic "Fort Warner" vs. "New Camp Warner"
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Camp Warner article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | A fact from Camp Warner appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 14 October 2009 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
Buildings at Fort Warner.
editAs of the mid-nineties, there still stood the remains of one building in the swale near a seasonal runoff reservoir used as a cattle tank, halfway between the Honey Creek bottom near the abandoned farm house and Big Valley. The walls of this building were erected using an unusual construction technique without studs, using 4/4 or 5/4 planks nailed top and bottom to grooved sole and top plates and fastened to each other with iron clips. Single wall construction. Maybe this would identify it as army issue. Packed earth floor. None of the line rider shacks or houses in this area used this method of construction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Uniquerman (talk • contribs) 02:55, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
"Fort Warner" vs. "New Camp Warner"
editIt appears there is a slow moving edit war regarding the name. I have no opinion and have no idea what is going on, but it needs to be discussed and consensus reached instead of the continual back and forth. So, discuss. Valfontis (talk) 20:50, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
- I feel that it needs to stay as New Camp Warner as it was never designated as a "Fort". It was always designated as a "Camp". Common lexicon denotes it as Fort Warner. But calling it that is not historically accurate. Also calling it something that it was not will only further confusing on the part of people researching the Camp. Also several photos taken in 1869 of building at New Camp Warner mention it as being called Camp Warner. Jocelyn, Stephen P., Mostly Alkali, The Caxton Printers, Ltd, Caldwell,Idaho, 1953, pp. 165-182. The author has several direct quotes taken from a journal written by his father where he never mentions it as Fort Warner. So while yes Fort Warner is an easy way to differentiate between the two, it isn't correct in it's use. There was a difference between a camp and a fort. A Fort was designed to be more permanent while a camp was temporary.Redstang64 (talk) 19:44, 11 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redstang64 (talk • contribs) 19:09, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
- Official names deserve being mentioned, but per Wikipedia's naming convention, the most widely used name is the one we use. —EncMstr (talk) 19:14, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
- The name Fort Warner is what it is called locally by those people who knew it was there, whether they are aware of the original Camp Warner on Hart Mountain or not. If you called it New Camp Warner, you were not necessarily understood. Fort Warner is common parlance. If you get stuck on "official" nomenclature, it would not be "New" Camp Warner either. It was Camp Warner officially, no matter which one you are referring to.Euonyman (talk) 19:23, 19 July 2015 (UTC)