Talk:Battle of Copenhagen (1807)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Norway Portal This article is part of WikiProject Norway, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Norway. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.

Portal	Battle of Copenhagen (1807) falls within the scope of WikiProject Denmark, a project to create and improve Denmark-related Wikipedia articles. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, all interested editors are welcome!
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. (FAQ). (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
High	This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.

	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 lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: 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 met Grammar: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces (general topics): Maritime warfare task force Associated task forces (nations and regions): British military history task force Nordic military history task force Associated task forces (periods and conflicts): Napoleonic era task force (c. 1792–1815)

Contents 1 Ships and their names 2 Historical myth? 3 General Wellesley 4 Crown Prince 5 The ship "Havfruen 36"

[edit] Ships and their names

Of the battleships which reached England, only 4 - Christian VII 80, Dannemark 74, Norge 74 and Princess Carolina 74 - were taken into British service.

Under what names were these ships commissioned into the Royal Navy? Bastie 04:47, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Actually these ARE the names under which these four vessels were added to the British Navy - any Danes will have already recognised that Princess Carolina is an anglicisation of the original Danish name Prindsesse Caroline. The other three did not change their names (the Christian VII was more usually referred to in Danish service as Christian den Syvende, so using the Roman numerals alone in British service saved the problem of translation!), but were adopted into the British Navy under the same names.

Not named in the introductory section of the article, another eleven Danish battleships were among the vessels taken by the British Navy - of which the 80-gun Neptunos was wrecked en route to Britain; the remaining ten were added to the British Navy also, but only saw service as harbour vessels. These were the 80-gun Waldemar (sister to the Neptunos) and nine 74-gun ships of the Prindsesse Sophia Frederica Class. Without wishing to self-promote, may I refer you to my 2005 book (British Warships in the Age of Sail 1793-1817 - see Reference sources cited at the end of the article) for full details of all these ships and of all the other vessels taken into the British service at Copenhagen in 1807?

I have added to the article a list of all the major British warships employed in the 1807 expedition to Copenhagen, and have done the same for the prizes seized from the Danish Navy (not those destroyed in the attack). Regards: Rif Winfield 86.132.139.7 06:57, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Historical myth?

Is there an external source to verify the last paragraph? This smacks of historical myth, so it would be good practice to back it up. - KD

I would imagine that the last paragraph was taken from the "Historical Notes" to Sharpe's Prey by Bernard Cornwell It certainly reads very similar. -Harlsbottom 00:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

It's unsourced, and I concur on it being "too good to be true", so I've taken it out for now. Shimgray | talk | 01:02, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

It wasn't just similar, it was identical ... along with most of the article. I've tagged the article as a copyvio. Bah! CWC(talk) 05:27, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for removing the copyvio material. Valentinian ^{(talk) / (contribs)} 13:03, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] General Wellesley

Is is just me or does this read oddly and seem inconsistent? We have General Lord Cathcart but General Wellesley - dropping the 'Sir Arthur' Personally I'd remove both ranks as they were both mostly known by their titles, being as much politicians as generals. Alci12 23:16, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Lord Cathcart held a hereditary title and so was properly called Captain Lord Cathcart, Colonel Lord Cathcart, etc. Wellesley's proper style at the time was "Major-General The Rt Hon. Sir Arthur Wellesley, KB" (see Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington#Styles), for which General Wellesley is the proper short form. CWC(talk) 05:27, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Crown Prince

Shouldn't the words "Crown Prince" link to Frederick VI of Denmark, rather than to an explanation of the phrase? -KO

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.241.122.39 (talk • contribs)

Fixed. Well spotted. Valentinian ^{T / C} 21:04, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The ship "Havfruen 36"

The following ship appears twice: "Havfruen 36 - sailed to Britain, added to British Navy as Hasfruen 36". Is this on purpose? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Helth (talk • contribs) 13:21, 12 October 2007 (UTC)