This   level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

National Register of Historic Places High‑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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Protected areas High‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Protected areas, a WikiProject related to national parks and other protected natural or ecological areas worldwide.Protected areasWikipedia:WikiProject Protected areasTemplate:WikiProject Protected areasProtected areas articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. United States: New Mexico Low‑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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject New Mexico.

There is a request, submitted by Catfurball, for an audio version of this article to be created. For further information, see WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia. The rationale behind the request is: "Important".

Android79 removed the link I added, calling it "self-promotional external link". It also describes a hike through the dunes and has three pictures. Certainly useful information for those who might be considering taking a hike there, and enhancing the quality and authority of this page by providing on-topic information. The article currently says, "Four marked trails allow to explore the dunes by foot." My link describes one of those, and I'll add links to other trip reports later. LonewackoDotCom

• And apparently you added it back in again; I again removed it, though the history doesn't show your second edit. Weird. Anyway, I didn't notice you posting here on the talk page, and if I had, I wouldn't have reverted again. My apologies. Anyway, I don't feel it's appropriate to link to one's own personal blog, and since your username is "LonewackoDotCom" it looked like linkspam. I've had a closer look at your blog entry and am undecided at this point whether or not I think it's appropriate. AиDя01D TALK EMAIL 19:58, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
• The link should be removed not because it goes to a personal site but because the page itself is sparse with information and barely even a useful read for anyone wanting to visit the dunes.

I recently uploaded an article I wrote about my visit to White Sands. Some one removed it? Can anybody tell me why. Bob

I have an image to illustrate the other main activity at White Sands. Kids sledding down the dunes. Right now I'm indifferent whether I should put it on the page or not...

Considering the United States recently made the mistake of importing several metric shittons of Chinese Drywall, I have to ask ... what possible rationalization is there for making this a protected area? Its quite visibly DEAD in most areas, and the deadest areas would be the most commercially viable! Don't get me wrong here, I'm not suggesting any sort of capitalist-minded "drill baby drill" approach - but wouldn't it make sense to at least allow responsible use of the area? Imagine if it were required that any holes created in the landscape were replaced with, for example, rocks and topsoil.. someday, endangered species might actually be able to live there! Zaphraud ( talk) 22:58, 22 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Whatever you are complaining about is completely useless and unrelated to this article. You clearly have no understanding or appreciation of the geology of the place. Your comment has no reason for being on this page at all and it should be removed.

ICE77 ( talk) 07:38, 24 October 2018 (UTC) reply

While White Sands National Monument is a part of White Sands Missile Range, the Trinity test site is not a part of the Monument. Why is it listed on the WSNM page? (Last sentence of "Description" section.) 71.234.215.133 ( talk) 03:05, 8 September 2010 (UTC) reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on White Sands National Monument. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{ cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{ nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110716081434/http://co.otero.nm.us/Ordinances/07-05.pdf to http://co.otero.nm.us/Ordinances/07-05.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{ Sourcecheck}}).

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.— ^{cyberbot II} _{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:53, 28 February 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on White Sands National 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/20141110122215/http://www.nmhistoricpreservation.org/assets/files/registers/2012%20Report_%20Section%203_%20Arranged%20by%20Number.pdf to http://www.nmhistoricpreservation.org/assets/files/registers/2012%20Report_%20Section%203_%20Arranged%20by%20Number.pdf

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) 22:34, 3 September 2017 (UTC) reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on White Sands National 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/20080513214949/http://www.doi.gov/news/08_News_Releases/080122a.html to http://www.doi.gov/news/08_News_Releases/080122a.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) 07:47, 23 November 2017 (UTC) reply

• Evidence of humans in North America during the Last Glacial Maximum (2021) Viriditas ( talk) 20:56, 23 September 2021 (UTC) reply

Thank you. Viriditas ( talk) 22:23, 24 September 2021 (UTC) reply