Fort Towson

United States: Presidents / History Low‑importance

	United States portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject United States Presidents (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. history (assessed as Mid-importance).

History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Splitting proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was to Split 1967. The rest of the years will remain on this article for now. Walk Like an Egyptian (talk) 06:51, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I propose that the article be split into six:

FoxyGrampa75 (talk) 01:23, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

1965 has five entries and 1966 has about three times as many. So because of the size of '64 and '67, we're going to make three articles (1963, 1965, and 1966) that barely have anything? The argument would then be add after the fact, but that's assuming someone else is going to do that. Informant16 November 9, 2018

I don't think it's necessary to split up the timelines. While the byte count is large and would usually warrant a split, the lack of images on the timelines means the pages themselves actually load pretty quickly for readers. I also think it's beneficial to have all the years in one article. Ethanbas ^(talk) 19:12, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The page code is currently 484,779 bytes long. Of course it needs to be split. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:10, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.