Talk:Fort Reliance

Untitled

I think that this is a great article, however it seems like what the author added sounds like they're telling a story. The building shouldn't be described as (insert description here). It should say the building was (insert description here). you can give credit to who described it in the citation of the article. Focus on the facts, not the story and who told it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swenzl160 (talk • contribs) 14:46, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Peer Review

This a great article. It has historical notability, and it is very interesting.

Mr. Clausen recommended that we have five to six sources, you may want to look for another. But four is pretty close.

You might be able to add links for some of those notable names that are included in the article. Possibly even the Native Han people. You might not want to call them "Indians" in the article though. Especially considering how critical political correctness is these days.

You may even be able to expand on the "gold strike" in the second paragraph if you are looking to add more to the article. This could unearth some potentially interesting information to add.

I think its great that you included links for the king and chum salmon.

During the introductory paragraph, you may want to consider expanding on what a "trading post" is. This could help increase the clarity of the entire topic.

Is there any information anywhere about how Fort Reliance got its name? That could be an interesting inclusion.

Overall a great article, a few spots have the potential to increase clarity.

Wmalcom2 (talk) 23:10, 5 April 2016 (UTC) Will Malcom

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Swenzl160.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 11:09, 18 January 2022 (UTC)