Battle of Backbone Mountain

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

United States: Kentucky High‑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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Kentucky (assessed as High-importance). National Register of Historic Places Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places 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.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Military history: Memorials / North America / United States / American Civil War 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 Associated task forces: /  Military memorials and cemeteries task force North American military history task force United States military history task force American Civil War task force

The article is an article, despite the word "List" in its title. It is a list-like article, like the fifty-three or so state-specific articles such as List of National Historic Landmarks in Kentucky. The article could develop in a progression from Stub to Start to B class. Then, probably it would not pass "Good Article" review because reviewers would then say it is more suited to Featured List review, but would go to "Featured List". There is no such class as "Good List" in wikipedia currently. I am assigning it class = start already because it is already fairly substantial and it includes the key official reference, the MPS document. It could be argued that this still deserves Stub rating, though. But it should be rated as an article not in "NA-class". doncram (talk) 00:54, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I won't start this article until I take the pic, but the NHRP as it as Confederate Memorial in Peewee Valley, but the town is called Pewee Valley, not Peewee. Should the article be written with the extra "e" or not?--Bedford (talk) 02:05, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should reflect the spelling in the actual/official NRHP name for the site, which I gather is Peewee and I gather that is not current usage. It is the official NRHP name though, i take it. It is okay to reflect different names for the same site. However, for some sites where i was really sure the National Park Service had the name wrong, rather than their using an old but valid variant, I have informed the NPS and gotten a name corrected (for some NHLs). doncram (talk) 05:47, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bedford asked for comments, here are some quick ones.

• I basically like the new table. I see you choose to organize by county, rather than by name of memorial site, which is fine.
  • So many started with "Confederate Monument..." that I thought county would work better.
• The intro says there are 62 memorials, but the table lists only 60.
  • Somewhere I saw the count of 62, but after recounting, I now see only 60. I'll need to go through many of my older articles and change the number.
• The article would be improved by having a Google map link, as for one example is in place showing as "Map of all coordinates" in List of RHPs in OC. It is generated by {{GeoGroupTemplate}} template, using all coordinates available in any acceptable format in the article, such as <small>{{coord|33|44|29|N|117|49|43|W|name=Artz Building}}</small>. Latitude and longitude should not be separate columns, there should just be a single coordinates call for each place, which could be in one column or could be included with, say, the town name.
• About the name of the article, I understand that it is based on an MPS and what that is, but most wikipedia readers do not know, so not sure if MPS should be in the article name. Are there any other Civil War Monuments in Kentucky? Why not cover them all. Obviously these ones are all notable and should be included.
  • The other two that are mentioned are Lincoln Birthplace and Davis birthplace, which were on the Register long before these.
• About column-width sizing: i noticed the year built column looked wider than necessary. Then I observe that you have put in fixed percentages to fix the column-widths in the table definition. I used to do that, but have been finding that not specifying any column-widths seems to work better usually. The algorithms available now for table sizing are really pretty good, and update for current content of the table, and seem to be well implemented in wikitables now, in my view. As you add more to the Summary descriptions column, you want that to expand naturally. So, i think drop the fixed column width specifications.
  • I borrow the table for the South Carolina list of NRHP, which is why the oddball percentages
• That's all for now. It is shaping up nicely. Hope these comments help! doncram (talk) 05:47, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • They did, thanks.--Bedford 13:31, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, the reason I did the lat and long. the way I did was so people could see which ones were farther north/south, and which were further east/west.--Bedford 03:01, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, good. About the lat and long numbers, I am not sure if i could or would process that properly in my head. Many readers would not accurately tell which was further east or west, aren't we in the negatives range of longitudes? Pretty obviously, having an actual map of all the sites included in the article would be best. I think the Google map link option is pretty good and helpful, although outside the article. Keep up the good work! cheers, doncram (talk) 08:07, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Granville Allen Post #98 of the GAR dedicated a monument to the post's namesake in the Johnson Cemetery near Morgantown, Kentucky near the site where Allen was killed in a skirmish on October 29, 1861. Was this monument overlooked? Can anyone provide a photo of the monument? Should it be included on this list?
--Spacini (talk) 01:53, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It might have been overlooked. I had discovered another monument left off the list. However, these were the ones that made it on the NRHP together, so the list is complete in that list. I hope to make this a Featured list sometime this year.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 02:57, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The list of Civil War Monuments of Kentucky lists the 60 American Civil War monuments in Kentucky that were added to the National Register of Historic Places on July 17, 1997, as a result of a Multiple Property Submission (MPS).

Although Kentucky produced more Union troops than Confederate troops (75,000 compared to 50,000), only one of the 62 monuments were dedicated to Union forces.

However, 61 propertys are listed in the article. --Matthiasb (talk) 12:22, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have left off your list the monument at the Hopkins County courthouse in Madisonville. See the photo in the link.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madisonville,_Kentucky

Leedurhamstone (talk) 07:18, 30 April 2020 (UTC)Lee Durham Stone[reply]