Talk:San Jacinto Monument

Obelisk ?

Q. Is the San Jacinto Monument an obelisk, or is the top too ornate compared to a simple pyramid for it to be so classified? DFH 19:07, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Incorrect Coordinates

The coordinates for The San Jacinto Monument have been rounded and, as a result, are off. The listed coordinates are about 1 mile WNW in the shipping channel. The actual coordinates are N 29° 44.721 W 095° 04.983 (UTM: 15R E 298561 N 3292385). Since I do not have the ability to change them I am leaving this message. For more information see: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?wp=GCF453&Submit6=Go --Your Fuzzy God 18:09, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Corrected. Not sure why you couldn't change it. Victor Engel (talk) 18:15, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Is It or Isn't it?

The first paragraph is rather confusing -- is the monument the tallest or is it not? Is the Saint Louis Arch the tallest? What is the inetnt of this mishmash of sentences?

The description section's listings for area

The description section describes the base as having an area 125 square feet and containing a museum. Now unless the museum consists of a smallish size kid's bedroom I don't think that is possible. I think the entire section may be confusing a square of a given a length per side as square feet. A square with a side length of 125 feet is certainly not 125 square feet(its 15,625 square feet), and I think this error is compounded in the entire section. As I have don't have access to the actual dimensions of the memorial I was loathe to make the change myself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.1.74.177 (talk) 00:02, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you that it sounds weird, but that is what the source says.[1]. If you can find a different source, we can definitely change this. Karanacs (talk) 15:11, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Corrected - the source was being misread —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.151.251.35 (talk) 05:57, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

For Some Reason This Article Keeps Moving It To Deer Park

The San Jacinto monument is NOT in Deer Park it is in La Porte. If you look at the web site http://www.sanjacinto-museum.org/ for the museum, which is at the monument you will see that the address is One Monument Circle, La Porte. It is not "near the city of Deer Park" it is IN the City of La Porte. In fact the top of it is used as the header on the city of La Porte web site http://www.ci.la-porte.tx.us/ Perhaps there is some confusion as to the meaning of "city" in Texas. A "City" in Texas does not have to be a built up urban area it is just the land within the city limits. There is no "unincorporated area" in La Porte. I live in La Porte, in a subdivision off the same road as the monument / battleground and I assure you it is within the La Porte City Limits. Deer Park begins at the corner of Underwood Road and Pasadena Blvd. The park, monument, battleground, museum, and battleship are all well within La Porte territory. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.139.150.19 (talk) 17:27, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

File:SanJacintoBattle.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:SanJacintoBattle.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 22:17, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

This sentence

But, following a series of revolutions begun in 1829, unscrupulous rulers successively seized power in Mexico.

Should this sentence form of began be written like this? This might be incorrect but I don't know how the reference wrote it. Robert4565 (talk) 19:41, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

since the entire section of the article is a direct quote from the engraved text on the monument itself, it has to stand as is. Ken (talk) 20:13, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Also, does this not have a 'winners' slant because Santa Anna was President of Mexico back when Moses Austin first asked for Anglo citizenship. That puts the 'unscrupulous' accusation into Euro Centric spin. The problem Mexico had with Anglo immigrants was, despite the order and citizenship swearing, promise to not bring slaves. illegal Anglo families ignored the law, brought in slaves and seized a main Mexican City (San Antonio) and others.

Not owning humans within their legitimate national border was the Mexican "oppression" the inscription references and little more. This is sensationalism, whitewashed of the Mexican concern at the time.

This monument is an homage to Anglo political power, most acceptable in 1936. -- Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.85.116.93 (talk) 15:32, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

To be fair, the Texas settlers were used to being a semi-autonomous zone under the federalist constitution of 1824, and the change to The Centralist Republic of Mexico was a shock in several ways... AnonMoos (talk) 19:59, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on San Jacinto Monument. 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/20130226023709/http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=623&ResourceType=Site to http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=623&ResourceType=Site
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060306083950/http://www.asce.org/history/build_sanjacinto.html to http://www.asce.org/history/build_sanjacinto.html

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) 15:58, 27 December 2017 (UTC)