Talk:New Mexico campaign

Errors

I fixed some errors in the article. "1st Colorado Volunteers" is a regiment name, and should not be "Coloradan". The seizing of Mesilla, New Mexico was not the same campaign, but was in the previous summer of 1861 and was led by John Baylor [1]. Sibley's campaign was in the spring of 1862. -- Decumanus 08:04, 2005 May 19 (UTC)

Winter of 1862, actually. By spring, the Sibley brigade was in full retreat back to Texas.

Forces

I have a question about the first line of the section "Forces".

"The Union forces located in the Department of New Mexico were led by Colonel Edward Canby..."

The "Department of New Mexico" would have been a division/section/subdivision of the US Army located in the New Mexico Territory. The land would have been called New Mexico Territory. The sentence should be either:

"The Union forces located in the New Mexico Territory were led by Colonel Edward Canby..."

- or -

"The Union forces in the Department of New Mexico were led by Colonel Edward Canby..."

Is there a preference ? Jes007 (talk) 17:45, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

New question:> I am a very amateur historian, in that I am tracing my own genealogy in Texas. I am wondering if there is available anywhere a listing of those who participated (muster rolls and/or rosters) in the Confederate forces in this particular campaign. I have documented cousins named Casillas in the Battle of Bejar (Siege of Bexar) and the Battle of San Jacinto. I understand that a Casillas was with the Confederates in New Mexico, and wish to document that as well. A listing of the muster rolls of each side would be more than passing interst to readers, since it suddenly makes dry history come alive.

Thank you.

Hank Ortega hankpac@yahoo.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hankpac (talk • contribs) 03:37, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Spellcheck

Under the March to Santa Fe section, the exact quote: "who co-operate witht the enemy will be treated accordingly, and must be prepard to share their fate."

...are the words "witht" & "prepard" mispelled that way within the quote or is this a copyist error? Cheers,
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 13:01, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

This is a copyist error and has been corrected. (Sorry about that!) Wild Wolf (talk) 20:02, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

rename

I am renaming this page to "East Arizona and New Mexico Campaign" because the Battle of Valverde occurred in Confederate Arizona not New Mexico Territory. --Aj4444 (talk) 03:48, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Actually, the Union New Mexico Territory included Confederate Arizona. Wild Wolf (talk) 14:03, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Plus, the term "East Arizona and New Mexico Campaign" does not seem to be the common name preferred in reliable sources. I moved it back; it should not be changed without a discussion.--Cúchullain ^t/c 19:22, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Since you are the one desiring the change, the burden of evidence is on you to defend it. As I said above "East Arizona and New Mexico Campaign" does not seem to be a common name, and therefore can't be used as an article title.--Cúchullain ^t/c 20:41, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Wild wolf and Cuchullain

You are both wrong, Wild Wolf, you say Confederate Arizona was apart of Union New Mexico territory. This is completely false. Union New Mexico and Confederate Arizona were two seperate territories one governed by the Union the other governed by the Confederacy. Union Arizona territory did not exist until 1863, the campaigns occurred in 1861 and 1862, at the time of the Mesilla and Valverde engagements happened in the region of Confederate Arizona, this is fact. Whoever changed it back was seriously lazy about it, although I will not explain why.

Cuchullain, you say it should be named New Mexico Campaign because that is what most other people call it. Well I am sorry If I dont think we should babdly name an article because most people are too stupid to realize the fighting occurred in Arizona Territory aswell and not just New Mexico.

As I said before I am changing this article back to "East Arizona and New Mexico Campaign" because this title most accurately describes the location of the offensive.--Aj4444 (talk) 20:46, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I guess you can add me to the group of "wrong" people. The National Park Service is often used as the arbiter in these types of Civil War disputes and they go with Sibley's New Mexico Campaign (see [2]). If you have sources that refer to the campaign using east Arizona, then please produce them. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 20:53, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Look at the map I provided, clearly it say battles of the offensive occurred in both Confederate Arizona and New Mexico territory, which is exactly why the title "New Mexico Campaign" does not accurately describe the location of the offensive. Thus meaning "New Mexico Campaign" is unhistoric and unencyclopedic. --Aj4444 (talk) 21:00, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I prefer the maps in Josephy's "The Civil War in the American West" on pages 4, 32, and 62 -- the last of which is titled "New Mexico Campaign, 1862". Even the website you apparently obtained the map from does not speak of an East Arizona Campaign. It seems clear where Wikpedia guidelines fall on this subject. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 21:20, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

To reiterate once again, Wikipedia article titles go by common names, not by whatever name some passing know-it-all thinks is "right". Aj4444, Until you provide reliable sources indicating that "East Arizona and New Mexico Campaign" is in common use (or is used at all) you have no leg to stand on. (As an aside, I am sure the common name refers to the New Mexico Territory as claimed by the US, in which case all of the battles did occur in "New Mexico".)--Cúchullain ^t/c 21:01, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

It seems clear to everyone but Aj4444 (who I've just blocked for incivility and personal attacks) that "New Mexico Campaign" is best title for the article.--Cúchullain ^t/c 22:03, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree with retaining New Mexico Campaign. It is certainly acceptable, however, to have a parenthetical or footnote explanation in the first paragraph of the geographic dispute involved here. One thing that needs to be fixed--I removed the copyrighted map image and it has reappeared in the edit-protected version. (This is a modern map and its source website claims copyright over all the modern images. The image itself should be deleted as well.) Hal Jespersen (talk) 23:59, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I removed the image per your comment.--Cúchullain ^t/c 00:12, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Requested move 21 February 2021

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 (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 11:37, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

---

New Mexico Campaign → New Mexico campaign – In sentence context, sources say "New Mexico campaign" in most cases. There's no reason to elevate campaign as is part of a proper name. Capped uses in sources are mostly in references to book and article titles such as Hall's Sibley's New Mexico Campaign; that same phrase in a sentence is not capped. And as a reminder, per WP:NCCAPS, WP uses sentence case for titles. Dicklyon (talk) 04:40, 21 February 2021 (UTC),

I support the change. Looking at the wikipedia articles for other Civil War campaigns, the word 'campaign' is not capitalized in article titles, so basic uniformity of style would dictate doing the same here. 82.176.221.176 (talk) 10:32, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

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.