Talk:Oregon Trail

message: Removed http://www.pbs.org/opb/oregontrail/teacher/trailmap.html -- PBS lists the page as having been retired --Carnildo 07:41, 29 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Quite likely that it was still used that late, and even later. I've seen paintings, photos, and reports of trains stopping for wagon trains, and vice versa. Further, US Highway 26 follows the trail for part of its length. --Carnildo 07:42, 30 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed link

message: Thanks to the editor who did the cleanup. The article still needs sources and with all the additions and subtractions by various editors, I think the history section needs to have its facts checked. I'm not sure it's entirely chronological at this point, and has left out some key points. I'm not going to slap the  tag back on this, but I thought I'd make a note here. I hope to get around to it, but I also hope someone beats me to it. The routes section could use a going-over too. Katr67 15:48, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The article completely leaves out the Jedediah Smith/William Sublette/David Edward Jackson partnership that was instrumental in opening the trail. http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/grte/chap2.htm Katr67 05:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: I don't understand all the references to the Donner Party. They were following a branch of the California Trail when they were trapped, not the Oregon Trail. –Shoaler (talk) 10:14, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess because they were on the California Trail, which was identical to the Oregon Trail into Wyoming, where the two split. Still, seems a bit of a tangent, or could at least be described better. I'll see what I can do if I ever find more than 2 minutes of time.Pfly 21:18, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Donner Party

message: This article mentions US26 as a busy highway that follows much of the Oregon Trail. Wouldn't I-84 be a much better example here? In Oregon and Idaho, this interstate is full of historic Oregon Trail sites left and right, all over the place. This is also a great example of the major road of the past becoming a major road of the present.
71.212.22.51 (talk) 05:10, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  I-84 

message: First of all, I would like to thank everybody who has been working on this article lately, especially User:D'lin. The article has definitely been much improved over a few months ago. I want to discuss a re factoring of the history section - while the history of the Oregon territory is interesting, it is is outside of the scope of this article, since we are more interested in the trail rather then what attracted the travelers in the first place. I think we should make liberal use of the  template to point readers at the more detailed articles (such as Astorians, Lewis and Clark Expedition, Oregon country, etc). This may reduce the size of the article slightly, but I think it will end up making it more readable and more enjoyable to the average Joe. Following this refactoring, I think we should make a push for GA status, and follow that up with FA (some time before the deadline). Thoughts? CosmicPenguin (Talk) 16:19, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's nice to see people improving this article instead of vandalizing it! I haven't looked closely, but I'm pretty sure this article is very badly in need of citations, so I think we need to concentrate on that. For GA or FA, there needs to be at least one citation per paragraph. But that's not to say that we can just slap a ref at the end of every paragraph and call it good. Personally, I'm fan of citing just about every sentence, as that makes it easier for those adding to the article later. Many editors think that's a bit excessive, but I think we should make an effort to cite much of what is already in here, as the article has been largely unsourced for most of its existence. I think splitting off sub-articles is a great idea too. If I don't get around to it, drop a note at WikiProject Oregon--there are several of us who are into getting things up to GA and FA and I'm sure you will get some help (and god help you, lots of opinions!). Katr67 (talk) 18:15, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I finished the initial effort to refactor the history section - I tried to concentrate on facts that directly related to the trail and avoided the grander bits that are more appropriate to articles such as Oregon country. There are some more items that I think that we need to add to the history section- a short summary of the Mormon migration and Lander Road are two that stick in my mind. There are probably more, but these will have to wait for another night. CosmicPenguin (Talk) 05:48, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  As per WP:BRD, I was bold, User:D'lin reverted, and now we discuss. Like I stated before, I think that the information about the fur traders and other facts pertaining to the oregon country itself are interesting, but not for this article. This article should focus on the trail itself, and less on the factors that lead to the migration over the trail, which should be covered much more extensively in Oregon Country and other places. In particular, I removed Oregon Trail#The North West Co. and Hudson Bay Co. and Oregon Trail#Great American Desert - I don't have a problem with the rest of the history section, but it should be limited to the discovery and use of the trail. Thoughts? CosmicPenguin (Talk) 04:24, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Cleanup 

message: There's a good song by Woody called "Oregon trail". You might want to include the mention. Cheers, --CopperKettle 22:27, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Woody Guthrie's song 

message: I propose that this should be mentioned and a part of this Wiki on the Oregon Trail. The Oregon Trail Split from the Santa Fe Trail two miles West of Gardner. While there are other feeder trails, it seems to be that this was a big part leading out from Independence and Westport from what I have read up on this. The National Park Service has this covered here: http://www.nps.gov/archive/safe/fnl-sft/photos/kspages/sforgjct.htm The1who (talk) 09:58, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oregon Trail and Santa Fe Trail 

message: There seems to be some confusion concerning the distances between South Pass to Raft River and to Cathedral Rocks. Maybe the following will help.
See: 
A- Old Oregon Trail South Pass to Raft River
(1) South Pass to the Little Sandy = 20 miles.
(2) Little Sandy to Fort Bridger = 110 miles.
(3) Fort Bridger to Smith's Fork = 85 miles.
(4) Smiths Fork to Soda Springs = 70 miles.
(5) Soda Springs to Fort Hall = 55 miles.
(6) Fort Hall to Raft River = 40 miles.
Total: = 380 miles.
B- Old California Trail South Pass to Cathedral Rocks
(1) South Pass to Raft River 380 miles.
(2) Raft River to Cassia Creek = 40 miles.
(3) Cassia Creek to Cathedral Rocks = 25 miles.
Total: = 445.
C- 1844 Sublette-Greenwood Cutoff
(1) South Pass to Little Sandy = 20 Miles.
(2) Little Sandy to Smith's Fork = 110 miles.
(3) Smith's Fork to Raft River =
165 miles.
Total: South Pass to Raft River = 295 miles.
(4) South Pass to Raft River = 295 miles.
(5) Raft River to Cathedral Rocks = 65 miles.
Total: South Pass to Cathedral Rocks = 360 miles.
D- Hudspeth's Cutoff
(1) South Pass to Soda Springs via Fort Bridger = 285 miles.
(2) South Pass to Soda Springs via Sublette's Cutoff = 200 miles.
(3) Soda Springs to Cassia Creek = 130 Miles.
(4) Cassia Creek to Cathedral Rocks = 25 miles.
 Total: South pass to Cathedral Rocks via Fort Bridger = 440 miles.
Total: South Pass to Cathedral Rocks via Sublette's Cutoff = 355 miles.
E- Hastings's and Hensley's Cutoffs.
(1) South Pass to Fort Bridger = 130 miles.
(2) Hastings's Cutoff to Salt Lake City = 120 miles.
(3) Hensley's Cutoff to Cathedral Rocks = 190 miles.
(4) Cathedral Rocks to Raft River = 65 miles.
Total: South Pass to Cathedral Rocks = 440 miles.
Total: South Pass to Raft River = 505 miles
F- Lander's Cutoff
(1) South Pass to Fort Hall = 265 miles. 
(2) Fort Hall to Raft River = 40 miles.
(3) Fort Hall to Cathedral Rocks = 65 miles.
Total: South Pass to Raft River = 305 miles.
Total: South pass to Cathedral Rocks = 370 miles.Tinosa (talk) 04:31, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Travel Distances

message: I see that there is concern that this article may be too long. I suggest splitting into History of the Oregon Trail and Route of the Oregon Trail, as those sections are the longest and the broadest topics, and leaving a concise summary of those topics in this article. Any other ideas, or is this what should be done? --Jsayre64 (talk) 19:20, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like a good plan! Also probably a good idea to cut the lead § to 4 or 5 short paragraphs. -Pete (talk) 15:48, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure what details to omit, but I ran a copyedit and overall it removed the number of characters... surprising how many mistakes there were. :-) --Jsayre64 (talk) 16:39, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Since this hasn't proved to be much of a discussion, I've been bold and created History of the Oregon Trail. If there are concerns out there, now's the time to state them! :-) Jsayre64 (talk) 23:13, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: it's not too long for such an important topic. But splitting it this way is not helpful--people who only read one of the two articles will be thoroughly confused. Recommend keeping as it was. Rjensen (talk) 23:20, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Length 

message: ===Food===
The recommended amount of food to take for per adult was  of flour,  of corn meal,  of bacon,  of sugar,  of coffee,  of dried fruit,  of salt, half a pound (0.25 kg) of saleratus (baking powder/baking soda leavening mix),  of tea,  of rice, and  of beans. These provisions were usually kept in water-tight containers or barrels to minimize spoilage. The usual meal for breakfast, lunch and dinner along the trail was bacon, beans, and coffee, with biscuits or bread. The typical cost of food for four people for six months was about $150.Dary, David The Oregon Trail an American Saga; Alfred p. Knopf New York; 2004; pp 274;ISBN0-375-41399-5
208.67.132.5 (talk) 23:04, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Done Stickee (talk) 03:08, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup saleratus reference 

message: The recommended amount of food to take for per adult was  of flour,  of corn meal,  of bacon,  of sugar,  of coffee,  of dried fruit,  of salt, half a pound (0.25 kg) of saleratus (baking powder/baking soda leavening mix),  of tea,  of rice, and  of beans. These provisions were usually kept in water-tight containers or barrels to minimize spoilage. The usual meal for breakfast, lunch and dinner along the trail was bacon, beans, and coffee, with biscuits or bread. The typical cost of food for four people for six months was about $150.Dary, David The Oregon Trail an American Saga; Alfred p. Knopf New York; 2004; pp 274;ISBN0-375-41399-5
208.67.132.5 (talk) 23:04, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Done Stickee (talk) 03:08, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Food

message: I believe I detect an error in the sentence "By 1836, when the first migrant wagon train was organized in Independence, Missouri, a wagon train had been cleared to Fort Hall, Idaho." My guess is that the second occurrence of the word "train" should actually be "trail." One would not clear a "wagon train," but one would clear a "wagon trail." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.164.54.143 (talk) 03:57, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible Minor Error 

message: I've been searching all over to try to figure out how many people took part in westward expansion, but I can't seem to find statistics on this anywhere. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.69.109.8 (talk) 14:16, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It might be hard to understand with the point-of-view and experience of modern times, but in those days there were no passports, birth certificates, employment permits, driver licenses, or any other such nonsense. If you wanted to migrate westward, you cleaned up your affairs—settling accounts with your local general store, neighbors, employer—(or not) and then traveled west. The migration numbers we do have come from a patchwork of spotty records at tolls (bridges, fords, roads), notes made by random individuals traveling in large wagon trains, or happening to observe them passing by. There was a major dynamic with wagon trains merging and diverging with a hand full of origins and dozens of destinations. No one was tasked with keeping records, and the most thorough numbers we have could be inaccurate by more than 50%. —EncMstr (talk) 18:22, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: we do have the census every 10 years and it (1850 and after) says how many people live in the west and what state they were born in. It does NOT say how many died after moving west, or how many moved west then returned to the east. That is the census gives net flows. In 1850 California had 165,000 people and Oregon had 13,000. In 1860 the totals were 380,000 (Calif), 52,000 (Oregon) and 12,000 Washington. By 1870 Calif had 560,000, Oregon 91,000 and Washington 24,000. Rjensen (talk) 19:47, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes indeed. But how many were births and did not migrate? How many had homesteaded in the wilds and were not counted? It was not until 1850 that women and children were rigorously counted: before then the census counted male landowners. So correlating against the 1840 census would be challenging. Also, Native Americans who renounced their tribe tended to be counted, though there would not have been very many. —EncMstr (talk) 20:00, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is it so hard to find out how many people moved west? 

message: To identify the overlinks, I used a script based on the guidelines at WP:OVERLINK. The script detected many duplicate links of various kinds, and I removed them a few at a time, section by section. I thought I should explain here what I did and how. The script is at User:Ucucha/duplinks and can be used to find duplicate links in any article. Finetooth (talk) 19:20, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Overlinks

message: Reference 17 is an explanation - not a reference -- 92.74.51.243 (talk) 22:02, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: yes and it's a good use of notes. Rjensen (talk) 22:57, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference 17 

message: The last sentence of the Colorado section is grammatically/syntactically incorrect, but I can't change it since I don't know what the (original) writer of the article meant by it. Does anyone else know?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.162.104.85 (talk) 11:02, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colorado section 

message: The use of the word "Indian" throughout this article is both unaccurate and unhelpful, in a scholarly sense.  As is commonly known, a great deal of specific information is available on the domains and ranges of the dozens of tribes of North America, as are referenced in Wikipedia's own Native American's entry at Native Americans in the United States.
Using the correct names (and the cultural attributes) of these people would add measurably to the richness and accuracy of this entry.
As a start to cracking the wall of uniformity and error, I began a transition to identifying the specific tribes or nations encountered along the trail by replacing the generic and inaccurate word "Indian" with the phrase "indigenous people."
My work was immediately "reverted" by Richard Jensen (rjensen), in the style of someone fixing vandalism.  Mr Jensen did not send me an explanation (a courtesy well within the Wiki protocol, methinks) and has not responded to my inquiry about his action.  
I would like to work on the Oregon Trail entry; it can be much improved both by specifying the names of the cultural groups (in much the way the trappers, miners, farmers, ranchers, Mormons, etc., are already identified in the entry), by adding new information (the Whitmans were murdered at their Walla Walla mission by members of the Cayuse (Whitman Mission National Historic Site), and by establishing more documentation (references) outside of Wikipedia.
I hestitate to do this work as rjensen appears to be standing ready to "revert" edits under cloak of darkness.  I'd appreciate advice on how to handle this situation.  The Oregon Trail entry deserves better. Hlwelborn (talk) 21:34, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I encourage you to reword the article appropriately.  User  recently has been intensively doing citation repair and enhancement, though his revert of your inquiring on his talk page has the peculiar edit summary of Bad taste.  Maybe it was a misunderstanding?  I'll re-solicit his input here too.  —EncMstr (talk) 21:54, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: some advice: first a little more courtesy -- no more ugliness like "rjensen appears to be standing ready to "revert" edits under cloak of darkness."  Second we depend on experience here and Hlwelborn with only 15 edits in his career is too new to appreciate how wikipedia works. Third, we follow the reliable secondary sources here; regardingthe Oregon trail they rarely use terms like "indigenous peoples." They usually use "Indians" or name the tribe involved.  Fourth we don't change quotations as Hlwelborn did (he changed Trapper Jim Beckwourth described the scene as one of "Mirth, songs, dancing, shouting, trading, running, jumping, singing, racing, target-shooting, yarns, frolic, with all sorts of extravagances that white men or Indians could invent."  to "sorts of extravagances that white men or  indigenous people could invent."  -- that is a bad mistake, letting personal POV overcome historical accuracy.)  Fifth, when dealing with the people on the trail we stick to their language and do not impose 21st century terms they would never have used (he changed "Fear of Indian attack" to indigeous peoples).  Sixth, as for "Using the correct names" he did not attempt to do so. Seventh, as for Hlwelborn's personal views about the word "Indian" he has his private POV but those views are not widely held. "Indian" is  a well-respected standard  term in serious reference works.  For example look at the recent book titles from major university presses: Indian Blues: American Indians and the Politics of Music, 1879-1934 John W. Troutman (U of Oklahoma Press, 2012); The Indian Great Awakening: Religion and the Shaping of Native Cultures in Early America by Linford D. Fisher (Oxford University Press, 2012); Indian Tribes of Oklahoma: A Guide (Civilization of the American Indian Series, U of Oklahoma Press), by Professor Blue Clark, who holds the David Pendleton Chair in American Indian Studies and is Professor of History and Law at Oklahoma City University; Native Apostles: Black and Indian Missionaries in the British Atlantic World by Edward E. Andrews (Harvard University Press 2013); French and Indians in the Heart of North America, 1630-1815 ed. by Robert Englebert & Guillaume Teasdale (Michigan State University Press 2013). Rjensen (talk) 22:06, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indians 

message: In writing a family history that includes my great grandparents coming to Idaho partly on the Oregon Trail, I have found some information that I think may be incorrect, as follows:
The Wikipedia quoted “recommended” supply of food for an adult setting out on the Oregon Trail is shown in the table.  This recommendation had to have been made by the merchant selling the supplies.  The 313 lbs. sum of the recommended weighs does not include the weight of the containers.  The containers would have had to be either wood or iron so the containers would add maybe 20% to the net weight of the food.  That would bring the weight to 376 lb. for each adult.  That’s more than three times the weight of a combat solder’s pack and weapon.   Given that a pack horse’s load must be limited to about 30% of the horse’s weight, the horse to carry that pack of food would have to weigh more than 6000 lb.  The Budweiser Clydesdales weigh about 2000 to 2200 lb. apiece.
Elsewhere in the article is a statement that a man could join a wagon train for no cost by helping with herding animals etc.  I believe that my great grandfather and his three brothers did just that.  I find it hard to believe that they would have been accepted if another wagon would have been required to haul the food they would consume on the trip.
Another indication that the weights are too high is that in a 100 day trip each person was expected to eat more than three pounds of these dry commodities.  With water to cook added, that weight would be more in the seven lb. range, which I don't think is realistic.
I have no better information to provide but what's there would seem to need a credibility check.
Antiquerookie (talk) 06:15, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recommended food for one person 

message: Does anyone else think it's extremely problematic that the only mentions in this article of Native Americans/indigenous folks (see below) are when they have killed settlers?
It's completely one-sided and white-/Western-centric not to include how the westward expansion affected traditions, lands and lives of Native Americans.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tayloraapplegate (talk • contribs) 19:45, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: An analysis of the impact of the Oregon Trail on natives would be a welcome addition.  Alas, I don't know of any sources for adding such content.  If you do, please be bold and improve the article!  —EncMstr (talk) 23:20, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  One sided 

message: >>Western scout Kit Carson reputedly said, “The cowards never started and the weak died on the way.”<<
I don't write for Wikipedia, but someone should change this immediately. I've researched the quote and it's from Joaquin Miller, not Kit Carson.
http://barrypopik.com/index.php/new_york_city/entry/cowards_never_start_the_weak_never_finish_winners_never_quit/
Barry (talk) 16:24, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the suggestion, Barry. I made a slight change -- I did not use very confident language, because I haven't dug into it as much as you, and I'm not sure it wasn't said by Carson. Hopefully this is at least a small improvement; perhaps others will be able to state it more strongly, with better referencing. -Pete (talk) 18:11, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Kit Carson quote is actually from Joaquin Miller

message: Perhaps I might bring the benefit of being an outsider? I am not a US citizen or descendant! But I was surprised not to find a brief section on Oregon Trail Literature - under Legacy for example. It seems it is taught in the USA - quite rightly, I suppose, in view of its historic importance. See for e.g. "Recommended Oregon Trail Books for Students- An Annotated Bibliography," which  I quickly found using a well-known search engine.   
I would not presume to draft the proposed section, however - sorry but not in my realm of experience.
Okan 12:05, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Surprised not to find a brief section under Legacy on Literature

message: I don't see any mention of the Oregon Trail in Idaho following the geologic remains of the Yellowstone Hotspot, which had "flattened" out the landscape allowing a large portion of the trail to go over non-mountainous terrain.  Just a neat historical comment that the six or so eruptions of the Yellowstone supervolcano over the past 16 million years "paved" the way for the settlers of the 1800's to transverse a relatively "easy" path.
Ted from Florida (talk) 21:57, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oregon Trail in Idaho  

message: I've begun looking at the trail articles a bit closer as I'm looking to added a linking system; i.e., Before xxx ,  After xxx; in the articles along each trail.  Two items I have a concern about.
===Iowa ===
The Oregon trail, this article, did not go through Iowa.  Everything I've read shows that it started in Missouri (KC) then through Kansas to Nebraska.  If a trail user entered the trail from Omaha or Nebraska City, they came independently up the Missouri River or overland.  Anyways there is no Iowa linkage linkage on the Nat'l Historic Trail designation.  The section reads solely as a history of Iowa, no trail mention.  I recommend the section be removed.
:I agree that the section can be 99% removed with the rest rewritten per your analysis. But if you completely remove it, there will be an inconsistency with the second map in the infobox which shows a branch of the trail starting in Council Bluffs, which is in Iowa. The Oregon Trail: An American Saga (listed in the bibliography of this article) has multiple mentions of settlers choosing various starting points along the Missouri, including Council Bluffs. In addition, other sources such as the National Historic Oregon Trail Interpretive Center shows a map called "The Oregon Trail" which again shows a branch of the Oregon Trail starting in Council Bluffs. That map is interesting because it calls the trail that this article deals with the "Old Oregon Trail". It also shows trails which we wouldn't normally call the "Oregon Trail" today. This is all probably going to come down to a question of whether or not there was just one single canonical trail, as this article claims, or multiple variations in common use at the time of settlement. Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 02:17, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Iowa Section under Routes

message: The Oregon trail, this article, did not go through Iowa.  Everything I've read shows that it started in Missouri (KC) then through Kansas to Nebraska.  If a trail user entered the trail from Omaha or Nebraska City, they came independently up the Missouri River or overland.  Anyways there is no Iowa linkage linkage on the Nat'l Historic Trail designation.  The section reads solely as a history of Iowa, no trail mention.  I recommend the section be removed.
:I agree that the section can be 99% removed with the rest rewritten per your analysis. But if you completely remove it, there will be an inconsistency with the second map in the infobox which shows a branch of the trail starting in Council Bluffs, which is in Iowa. The Oregon Trail: An American Saga (listed in the bibliography of this article) has multiple mentions of settlers choosing various starting points along the Missouri, including Council Bluffs. In addition, other sources such as the National Historic Oregon Trail Interpretive Center shows a map called "The Oregon Trail" which again shows a branch of the Oregon Trail starting in Council Bluffs. That map is interesting because it calls the trail that this article deals with the "Old Oregon Trail". It also shows trails which we wouldn't normally call the "Oregon Trail" today. This is all probably going to come down to a question of whether or not there was just one single canonical trail, as this article claims, or multiple variations in common use at the time of settlement. Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 02:17, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Iowa 

message: Now, here is an Iowa link, the Mormon Pioneer Trail, does cross Iowa and there is an extensive section 'Mormon emigration' in the History Section.  It's linked to the main article on Mormon emigration.  The first paragraph is a recap of Mormon trail history, outside the preview of this article. It should be capsulized.  The second paragraph implies that the Mormons traveled the California and Oregon Trail, where as the trails overlapped through Wyoming, the Mormons were not using these other trails, they had their own guides, supply processes, camping spots and it's only from Fort Laramie in Wyoming to Fort Bridger (Wyoming) that the routes overlapped.  This material is well covered in the Mormon Trail article and should be reduced dramatically here. The last paragraph does add information about the non-Mormon users of the Oregon & California Trail.
* I'm working on the points of interest along all three trails, but will return in several months to begin renovations of this article in these two sections.  Comments are welcome changes by other editors welcome.  --Chris Light (talk) 19:45, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Mormon emigration

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :The 6 non-parishable foods of the Oregon Trail and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 25#The 6 non-parishable foods of the Oregon Trail until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  HouseBlastertalk 22:38, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "The 6 non-parishable foods of the Oregon Trail" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :The Oregon Trail (video game and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 27#The Oregon Trail (video game until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Steel1943 (talk) 19:14, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "The Oregon Trail (video game" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]