Talk:Methodist Mission in Oregon

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

Methodist/Oregon Mission[edit]

I see articles that refer to the Oregon Mission and others that refer to the Methodist Mission. I think there is a difference, but I believe the content in this article is more specific the Oregon Mission, and the Methodist Mission refers to any missionary activity by the Methodists during the era? Katr67 00:11, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sounds good to me! I will read both articles more carefully. --Stormbay 00:55, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, they aren't that different yet, but they should be! I'll do some research, but what say Aboutmovies? Katr67 01:52, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
They are different. Though I think opposite of what is mentioned above. The Methodist Mission refers to Lee's mission at Mission Bottom/Mill. The Oregon Mission article I think is supposed to be about the larger movement which could include the additional Methodist spots in Oregon City, The Dalles (run by Lee's nephew Daniel Lee), Umpqua, Nisqually, and in Astoria too. I take that partly by the dates given since Mission Bottom didn't open till 1834. However, they may need to be merged if they can't be delineated, but most of the historical references are to the Methodist Mission, not the Oregon Mission. In fact in the reference by Hines on Oregon Mission, other than the title, it is refered to as the mission (majority of references are this), or the Oregon mission (only a few times), not as a proper noun (the book is available on Google books for research to add content to the articles). So historically it is known as the Methodist Mission, I think in part to differentiate from the Whitmans, the Catholic missions, and whatever denomination the Spauldings were teaching. For me I think it could be two articles, but just one would work. Aboutmovies 07:17, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not consulting histories of Oregon for MOSTCOMMON usage is highly relevant; I know you're in WP:Oregon and I noted you did not take part in the one-man nomination/discussion. I don't have time or energy to contest this merge and the new title, but I do think it is not correct and that "Oregon Mission" should be a separate article as meaning an important part of Oregon history as distinct within the history of Methodist missions at large. All very relevant.Skookum1 (talk) 04:08, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this (lack of a) discussion was to go forth with merger Voltaire's Vaquero (talk) 20:36, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The information of the Oregon Mission article should be added into the Methodist Mission article to reduce potential confusions. Literature from (or about) the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions generally referred to the missions ran by Spaulding and Whitman as the Oregon Mission, potentially creating an amount of confusion with the Methodists. More importantly, the two articles are covering the same topic and therefore have a large amount of overlay. Voltaire's Vaquero 13:58, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Wow, 7 days on the nose, and you opened and closed it yourself.....did you think to notify WikiProject Oregon. Did you look up googlestats to prove that the new title is the MOSTCOMMON usage for this mission? Did you consider that the new title is highly ambiguous and that there were other Methodist Missions in the world??Skookum1 (talk) 11:10, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Skooks, yet again, chill out and watch the civility. Not sure how you are counting, but the discussion was opened July 21, and closed August 13, which by my count is a lot more than 7 days. Not to mention, if you look at the section above, it was sort of discussed seven years ago. Aboutmovies (talk) 19:10, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I jumbled the months; it was late in my timezone and wasn't seeing straight.Skookum1 (talk) 02:17, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I apologize for any over boldness on my part, but I felt after a few weeks of no discussion it wouldn't be an issue. In the future I certainly will contact the Oregon WikiProject for input and coordination for such actions. The reason I chose Methodist Mission over Oregon Mission for the location of the merger is that the latter term is often used in accounts to detail the operations of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions as well as the Methodist stations. The title of the article is far from new however, so please refrain from insinuating I created it. I personally feel something like Methodist Mission of Oregon would much more accurate, because as you say quite correctly, the Methodists ran a plethora of stations across the globe. Voltaire's Vaquero (talk) 20:54, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Exactly, which is why this title is highly ambiguous, unless it's the most notable of them all; even so it's very vague. From what I've seen of regional histories, "Oregon Mission" is the most common usage, though I haven't yet had time to conduct a google stats comparison. Please revert your move and if you wish launch an RM to settle the matter.Skookum1 (talk) 02:16, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This was not a move, but a merger of one article into another that largely overlapped (I personally think they should be separate and made to better differentiate the two, but that never happened). Thus, what occurred was proper. If you have an issue with the title, that is a different issue, and frankly we do not disambiguate unless there is more than one article by the same title. Note that Google stats should likely be used with caution given the topic is rather old, and the impact that Wikipedia has on how names are used. As I suggested above 7 years ago, a review of historical materials (Google books would be a good option) would be a better option. But ultimately, nothing raised by Skookum1 is relevant to what occurred. Aboutmovies (talk) 03:22, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with @Aboutmovies:, and I'd go further -- @Voltaire's Vaquero: not only merged the articles, but also added a substantial amount of new, cited information. Looks like things are going really well here. There are always going to be varying opinions about what is the best way to structure things, but complaining about good work isn't usually a productive way to express those different opinions. -Pete (talk) 22:00, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reorganisation of content[edit]

I've been mulling over it since the merger and will begin to fiddle with the article some more. As Aboutmovies said, it makes sense for the various separate missions to have separate articles, despite how short they would be. After that's done, there's the question as how to refer to the overall Methodist Missionary effort. Methodist Mission itself is a location, though it along with Oregon Mission are the typical names used by scholars for the organization. I don't know what would be concise and appropriate, given that Methodist Oregon Mission seems a bit too long. Voltaire's Vaquero (talk) 07:45, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Methodist Mission in Oregon. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 19:30, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Methodist_Mission_in_Oregon&oldid=1200079647"