This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
One user is constantly adding unsourced figures to the article claiming that they are either "Original numbers" or "figueres of the author who founded this article" (of course that's not a valid argument, and besides that the figure was in fact not the "original" one in this article as s/he claims). He never gives any sources for the claimed figure of 1000 killed. Altough there is a source (a Swedish encyclopedia) available online that says there were about 3000 killed at the battle [1]. Note that the same user is doing the same disruptive edits to several other articles. Närking ( talk) 22:11, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Irrelavent. You are proven wrong, as the encyliopedia is from IMperial swedish times. Also, 1. My edits are disruptive int he eyes of a fool. 2. Ad hominem isn't welcome here, unlike you think.
Your only source clearly states that there were 3800 men on swedish side, where does the number 2200 came from? And some russian sources, this one for example, written by Yevgeny Tarle states that there was 7000 strong swedish force. -- ZeD unknown ( talk) 16:08, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Fof further information you can also look here: [2] -- Алексей03 ( talk) 10:12, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
One user is constantly adding unsourced figures to the article claiming that they are either "Original numbers" or "figueres of the author who founded this article" (of course that's not a valid argument, and besides that the figure was in fact not the "original" one in this article as s/he claims). He never gives any sources for the claimed figure of 1000 killed. Altough there is a source (a Swedish encyclopedia) available online that says there were about 3000 killed at the battle [1]. Note that the same user is doing the same disruptive edits to several other articles. Närking ( talk) 22:11, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Irrelavent. You are proven wrong, as the encyliopedia is from IMperial swedish times. Also, 1. My edits are disruptive int he eyes of a fool. 2. Ad hominem isn't welcome here, unlike you think.
Your only source clearly states that there were 3800 men on swedish side, where does the number 2200 came from? And some russian sources, this one for example, written by Yevgeny Tarle states that there was 7000 strong swedish force. -- ZeD unknown ( talk) 16:08, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Fof further information you can also look here: [2] -- Алексей03 ( talk) 10:12, 19 April 2009 (UTC)