Opothleyahola

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

South Dakota High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Dakota, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of South Dakota on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.South DakotaWikipedia:WikiProject South DakotaTemplate:WikiProject South DakotaSouth Dakota articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. United States: North Dakota Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject North Dakota. Former countries This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country articles Pritzker Military Library Low‑importance This article is related to the Pritzker Military Museum & Library WikiProject. Please copy assessments of the article from the most major WikiProject template to this one as needed.Pritzker Military LibraryWikipedia:GLAM/PritzkerTemplate:WikiProject Pritzker-GLAMPritzker Military Library-related articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. Military history: North America / United States / American Civil War C‑class This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles C This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale. Associated task forces: /  North American military history task force United States military history task force American Civil War task force

An editor left a comment about Pembina, ND being older than Medary, SD. Although the comment didn't really belong in the article as it sought to refute another statement made in the article, it appears to be correct, so I've removed both the Pembina comment and the sentence about Medary being the oldest 'town site'. Not really sure what counts as the 'oldest town', so I'll leave that to other editors if they have better knowledge/sources on the matter. AlexiusHoratius (talk) 18:52, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is that map even to scale or correct aspect ratio? It's not at all easy to see what part came from Idaho rather than Minnesota, and which part became Idaho and which part became Montana. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.56.36.162 (talk) 02:09, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dakota Territory. 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/20110625050445/http://blogs.denverpost.com/captured/2011/02/23/from-the-archive-frontier-life-in-the-west/2713/ to http://blogs.denverpost.com/captured/2011/02/23/from-the-archive-frontier-life-in-the-west/2713/

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) 11:10, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Sandcherry: Why have you removed all reference to the Richardson source? It was verifying quite a large chunk of the article which you have now left unsourced. SpinningSpark 13:29, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I removed Richardson as it failed verification and am replacing it with references supporting individual items. Please review my references and add to them or replace them as you see fit. Cheers! Sandcherry (talk) 15:52, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hang on. You removed it from one item because it failed verification, but then removed it from everwhere else because the ref was "undefined", a problem you caused by deleting the ref in the first place. Even the failed verification one is only a problem with the wrong page number being cited. Your action here is a bit extreme for the problem at hand. SpinningSpark 15:58, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. Feel free to add back the citation as appropriate. Sandcherry (talk) 22:01, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm inclined to just put back my original text and references. There was nothing wrong there (aside from the wrong pae number in the cite)> SpinningSpark 14:51, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! This is to let editors know that File:Dakota territory coat of arms (illustrated, 1876).jpg, a featured picture used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for August 3, 2022. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2022-08-03. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page. If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.9% of all FPs} 14:54, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Dakota Territory was an organized incorporated territory of the United States that existed from March 2, 1861, until November 2, 1889, when the final extent of the reduced territory was split and admitted to the Union as the states of North Dakota and South Dakota. This is the Dakota Territory's historical coat of arms, illustrated by Henry Mitchell in State Arms of the Union, published by Louis Prang in 1876. The design is based on the great seal of the territory, which was officially described as follows: A tree in the open field, the trunk of which is surrounded by a bundle of rods, bound with three bands; on the right plow, anvil, sledge, rake and fork; on the left, bow crossed with three arrows; Indian on horseback pursuing a buffalo toward the setting sun; foliage of the tree arched by half circle of thirteen stars, surrounded by the motto: "Liberty and Union, one and inseparable, now and forever". Illustration credit: Henry Mitchell; restored by Andrew Shiva Recently featured: Louis Désiré Blanquart-Evrard Painted buttonquail Ada Flatman Archive More featured pictures