Talk:Standoff at Eagle Pass

This article was nominated for deletion on 26 January 2024. The result of the discussion was speedy keep.

On 31 January 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved from Standoff at Eagle Pass to Mexico–United States border crisis of 2023–24. The result of the discussion was not moved.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Standoff at Eagle Pass article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 90 days

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Military history: North America / United States

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

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion not met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Politics: American Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

United States: Texas 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.
	Texas portal This article is supported by WikiProject Texas.

Missouri should be added to the list of states that support Texas[edit]

Yesterday, Missouri governor Mike Parson announced that he is sending National Guardsmen to the southern border.[1] This information should be added to the page. 98.20.148.59 (talk) 12:10, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done With due deference to the fact that Wikipedia is not the news, this does seem significant enough to warrant inclusion (especially as the other states which have committed troops are already present). Drummerdg (talk) 03:37, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Article needs to be updated for February[edit]

This article contains no updates for February 2024--I added the banner at the top. Also I support keeping Extended Confirmation Protection for now, but if there continues to be no change in the legal or physical situation, I would support reducing protection to semi-protected because the event will be in retrospect. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 16:03, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Declare the standoff over (Maybe)[edit]

What really has happened since the deadline ran out? I think Biden sanctioned Texas...and then what? Nothing, the Texas border guard has just been doing what it's doing since Abbot gave them the order. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I do not think this article has been updated (except the Date updates) at all during February. Unless Biden does do something else, I think it should be thought of as over, barring future developments that may occur, in that case, don't consider it such. BurnerAcountOneThousandAndOne (talk) 03:09, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And if there have been developments in February, that should be represented in the article. BurnerAcountOneThousandAndOne (talk) 03:10, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Texas is appealing, but a district court just granted an injunction against the law (SB4) Texas is using to try to take over immigration jurisdiction. https://x.com/chrisgeidner/status/1763283008713625920?s=20 2600:1700:3811:C5C0:FC69:54C6:ED47:ED9E (talk) 23:01, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to have fizzled out—I'd propose merging it into Operation Lone Star. Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 04:08, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree, it should be labeled as over, and also, the end date for it should be pushed back to an earlier one. BurnerAcountOneThousandAndOne (talk) 18:34, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion the standoff is over, but litigation over the US-Texas-Mexico border is ongoing, and this article is part of Operation Lone Star. I support keeping the article, but I agree the standoff is likely over. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 15:01, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

add tennessee[edit]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/tennessee-national-guard-deploying-southern-border-biden-admin-fails-act-gop-gov-says 2601:87:8300:27F0:D540:2413:9B17:13E (talk) 00:58, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A federal court has just said the Texas immigration law can go into effect[edit]

Add that to the infobox. And to the end of the article. Com Pinkerton Leter (talk) 18:14, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I went to the Supreme Court's website, and Justice Alito granted his own administrative stay of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals administrative stay. I'll add one sentence, but I won't add any outcomes because this is a current event and can change rapidly. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 03:29, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 March 2024[edit]

‹ The template below (Edit extended-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

the standoff is not over. i would also like to add the existing states who have signed bills and sent their national guards in support of Texas. Thomas2008tw (talk) 04:31, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Jamedeus (talk) 18:01, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 March 2024[edit]

‹ The template below (Edit extended-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Date is wrong Ilovehistory2011927 (talk) 12:38, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. RudolfRed (talk) 16:57, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 March 2024[edit]

‹ The template below (Edit extended-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Add the following, "A base, entitled 'Forward Operating Eagle', has begun being constructed at Eagle Pass, and can house up to 2,300 soldiers."

This has been covered in the news, and has warranted a Forbes article. See: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesfarrell/2024/02/16/texas-building-military-base-camp-at-eagle-pass-amid-showdown-with-border-patrol/?sh=59e15dab1a71 Kingofmapps (talk) 18:22, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done, with your wording and I made the link a source.

IMO this article no longer merits EC protection, as the physical standoff is over and mainly involves ongoing litigation. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 15:15, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Already done M.Bitton (talk) 13:59, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

End date?[edit]

It seems to me that the end date is a bit inaccurate. While I agree with some other comments of the talk page about it having "fizzled out", it was still ongoing well into January and is atleast technically still ongoing.

Here are some reports from Febuary and one from March: https://www.cbsnews.com/texas/video/eye-on-politics-bipartisan-border-bill-fails-as-standoff-in-eagle-pass-continues/ https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/standoff-eagle-pass https://www.newsweek.com/texas-military-razor-wire-migrant-crisis-greg-abbott-1878647

I would show the date as either 11th of Jan-present for now and then, until it either ends or a proper date for it having "fizzled out" is chosen, switching it for said date. The current set date of the 29th is not really accurate as far as I understand. Iska-Germany (talk) 22:40, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good, I'll make a change regarding this. Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 15:53, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The extended confirmation protection has been lowered to semi-protection.[edit]

I convinced the administrator to lower the protection, as this page has become much less controversial and heavily edited. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 02:22, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal[edit]

I'd propose that we merge this article with Operation Lone Star, as now that the news has died down the long-term significance of this 'standoff' has turned out to be questionable. See also WP:PERSISTENCE. Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 01:41, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]