Talk:Alamo Mission

message: There are now two images in the Modern use section; in a section this small it creates text sandwiching, which is against the MOS.  I don't particularly like either one, and would be willing to remove both. The museum hours image is really not that useful. The new image, which shows the small size of the building, is, in my opinion, unnecessary because it essentially duplicates the image in the infobox.  Unlike the image in the infobox, though, the new image is cluttered with people and umbrellas, distracting from the building (and it's a more depressing time of year).  I would prefer to remove both of these.  Thoughts?  Karanacs (talk) 14:49, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  images in Modern use section 

message: Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that :File:Alamo pano.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on March 6, 2012. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2012-03-06. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! —howcheng  {chat} 21:08, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:Alamo pano.jpg]] to appear as POTD soon 

message: I've tweaked the lead a bit and re-jigged the structure somewhat as the section originally headed History seemed to be an overview, and the detailed history followed (but under the same header levels). Also found several paragraphs/statements that were not cited (I did not request citations for the section I've now headed Overview since it seemed to be an introduction to the material that followed, which was largely cited, though admittedly I haven't checked that thoroughly). Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:13, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I notice my "Overview" section has now been blended with the formerly one-paragraph lead, which is fine by me (even if it means the lead is a bit bigger than average). Tks/cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 21:52, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It used to be part of the lead.   Someone must have moved it to history while I was retired. It will need to be trimmed at some point. Thanks for your fixes to this article and others. Karanacs (talk) 22:50, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent edits

message: I visited the Alamo in 1956 with my parents. It is an experience I will never forget as long as I live.My wife and I have visited at other times over the years, individually and together with our children.  My wife & I ,of 48 years visited last Monday, November 2,2015.It was a good visit, quite different, but ok! I feel the old memories will stay in my mind more so than the most recent visit. I realize one cannot stop progress and updates. The mood of the mission did not seem the same.The whole compound is sacred to me. So many people from so many different states and countries died for the Republic of Texas to survive. I respect that each one is mentioned in some way. That is awesome. To have the gift shop present items from predominantly CHINA,,, IS A DISGRACE to the memory of the fallen heroes of the Battle at the Alamo. My opinion,and mine only. REMEMBER THE ALAMO
DON ODEN
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.111.188.200 (talk) 00:20, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I fail utterly to see the relevance of the above comment in any shape or form, other than to bad-mouth the Chinese and wave a Tex/US flag in some nationalistic rant... Wikipedia has no place for such things, and I move this entire section be deleted. M R G WIKI999 (talk) 18:52, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

text: I second M R G WIKI999's claim. Blellington (talk) 01:10, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: Since the Alamo is now part of a World Heritage Site, the infobox should probably be changed from  to . The problem with infobox nrhp is that it cannot list the international World Heritage Site designation first, and thus makes it appear "less important" than the US designations. For examples of how infobox historic site would work, see Statue of Liberty and Independence Hall. Zzyzx11 (talk) 08:32, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox change 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Alamo Mission in San Antonio. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070312211457/http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=617&ResourceType=Building to http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=617&ResourceType=Building
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:07, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) – robertsky (talk) 17:13, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Alamo Mission in San Antonio →  – Per WP:Common Name. The Alamo is not regularly referred to as "Alamo Mission in San Antonio" and there are not other articles for Alamo Missions in other cities (that would warrant the target Alamo Mission (San Antonio), anyway). Ultimately, I do not think there is any good reason to not move the article. ‡ El cid, el campeador talk  16:42, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 8 September 2022