Talk:Battle of Fort Oswego
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Battle of Fort Oswego is within the scope of WikiProject France, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks. | |
| Stub | This article has been rated as stub-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments, explaining the ratings and/or suggest improvements.) |
|
 |
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. | ||||||||||
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. | ||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
[edit] request for peer review, Battle of the Thousand islands
Wikipedia:Peer review/Battle of the Thousand Islands/archive1
- I Just finished up the main body of this article on a relitivly small engagemet of the French and Indian War. I'm hopeing a peer review will bring some suggestions on how the article can be improved and hopfully bring some more info on the subject. I'd like to see more info on some of the personalities that don't have they're own page to link to, and some more detail on how the battle developed... Any input would be very much appreciated! Mike McGregor (Can) 18:13, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Suggestion: Put Results in the results line
My suggestion for putting Results in the results line of the infobox (rather than interpretation of results, such as who we think the victor was) is that is seems that when possible, we might state what the actual outcome was. While there are lots of way to win a battle (e.g. casualties, delaying/divert/distract enemy) in this case we can clearly state that the french caputured the fort. Why not just put the result of battle in the result box? -Gomm 17:01, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- This of course ignores the fact the the "Result" field was specifically created for "X victory" descriptions (Whether this is an interpretation, as you claim, is a highly debatable matter. The term is fairly ubiquitous to the writing of military history), a fact borne out in thousands of other articles. If you want to question this practice, be my guest, but please do so here before arbitrarily applying a new standard in only one article. Albrecht 17:28, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
