Talk:Barlow Road

message: If anyone has access to the following (all of which are cited for additional information in Oregon Geographic Names), it would really help this article:
* Oregon Historical Quarterly, v. 13, p. 287 (published by the Oregon Historical Society)
* Oregon Historical Quarterly, v. 13, p. 240
* Palmer, Joel. Journal of Travels Over the Rocky Mountains, pp. 62-83
* Sunday Oregonian, magazine section, May 29, 1938
— Twisted86 - Talk - at 06:57, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Additional info needed from these sources

message: A photo of some the wagon ruts would be excellent, too. — Twisted86 - Talk - at 08:06, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Photos

message: This article needs some sections. Here's a few suggestions.
* Blazing and construction of the road
* Route followed
Amen on this---with respect the east sideRvannatta 01:31, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've found a few tidbits and have begun a "Route" section.  —EncMstr 07:57, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sections 

message: Someone added this to the article:
:Many emigrants who traveled the Oregon Trail could not afford to use the Barlow Toll Road, and instead floated down the Columbia River to get to Oregon City.
I'm having trouble resolving this with the data I've encountered, so it's removed from the article unless someone can substantiate it.
Many of the bridges and ferries before the Barlow Road had toll charges of about the same price.  For example, to cross the Deschutes, Sherar's Bridge charged $7.75 for a party including S. B. Eakin, and Olney's ferry charged $3 per wagon.   References in the article give the price of a boat ride down the Columbia to be anywhere from $50 to $80.  I suppose the really poor might build a raft and float, but I haven't seen anything written like that.  —EncMstr 05:18, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think you're probably right to remove that. The book I have ("Barlow Road") notes 5 locations for the toll gate, which apparently moved around a few times; it has at least one anecdote about people trying to avoid the toll gates, and another story about an overweight Indian woman getting stuck in the toll gate and the hilarity that ensued. I find no mention of people trying to evade this toll more than any other, though, or choosing the Columbia for that reason. -Pete 06:05, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Excellent points.  A chronology of those sort of events would be a fine addition.  A reference which says one caused the other would be excellent:  know of any?  —EncMstr 06:25, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Excellent points indeed! I think it can be written in a way that suggests a connection, without strongly asserting it. (Of course, if there is such a reference, it should definitely be noted.) -Pete 06:28, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Couldn't they caulk the wagon and float it down? Heh heh. --NE2 10:32, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relative expense of Barlow Road 

message: Is the Barlow Road behind or to the left? The angle of the sign makes it unclear. --NE2 10:31, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it is to the right, where it says "weight limit 5 tons" and "one mile ahead".  —EncMstr 03:26, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Question about the photo

message: :GA review (see here for criteria)
#It is reasonably well written.
#:a (prose):  b (MoS): 
#:: 
#It is factually accurate and verifiable.
#:a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
#:: 
#It is broad in its coverage.
#:a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
#:: 
#It follows the neutral point of view policy.
#:Fair representation without bias: 
#:: 
#It is stable.
#:No edit wars etc.: 
#:: 
#It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
#:a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 
#:: 
#Overall: 
#:Pass/Fail: 
#:: </div>
Very interesting article! Let me know when all the changes are made. —Rob (talk) 04:32, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've addressed the first part of #1, and all of #2.  The latter may be problematic:  who is the author?  I put National Park Service since that seems the fairest.  Suggestions?  I'll look into the Hwy 26 issue now.  —EncMstr 06:32, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Yep, few people call it U.S. Route 26, so I've made it consistent to avoid confusion.  Even though I've commuted on it for years, I always thought it was Oregon Route 26 until I read about on Wikipedia.  —EncMstr 06:38, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: National Park Service, or even Department of the Interior will do. It looks good now, though. Thanks! —Rob (talk) 20:26, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA review 

message: The article on "Laurel forest" makes it clear that the reference to such a forest around Mt. Hood is ... aaaah.... not right.
Does this refer to thickets of Rhododendron macrophyllum, perhaps? Note that a thick stand of this rhododendron would not constitute a laurel forest, the key feature of which is the presence of members of the Lauraceae.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Floozybackloves (talk • contribs) 00:28, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right. That's wrong. I unlinked it. Per Oregon Geographic Names (pages 564-565) Laurel Hill in Clackamas County was likely erroneously named for the rhododendrons, same with Laurel Mountain in Polk County. Laurel, Oregon and Laurelwood, Oregon were named for the "laurel trees" in the area, but most likely it was Madrone. Will we ever know for sure what those folks were really hacking through? Wild rhodies can form pretty thick, uh, thickets--it probably looked like a forest, they can get pretty tall too... And I bet them was some old-growth rhodies. Valfontis (talk) 06:43, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Laurel forest? 

message: * https://oregonencyclopedia.org/articles/barlow_road/#.WTtgYBiZNPM ---Another Believer (Talk) 02:59, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source