This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on September 11, 2014. |
First let me say that this is a superb article. But it is seriously marred by the fact that it lists no references. And some statements need inline citations (For example, the quotes from Roosevelt and Churchill both need a citation.) I know there was a great book all about the battle that came out a few years ago (entitled something like "The Last Invasion"... but I may be remembering wrong)... I will look into that and add it if I can track it down. I hope others will do the same. Blueboar 19:42, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
It seems clear enough to me that the British were defeated on the lake, but withdrew on land. There were two separate battles, one of which was a decisive victory for the US, and the other of which was handed to them without significant engagement. This is a review of The Final Invasion: Plattsburgh, the War of 1812’s Most Decisive Battle by David G. Fitz-Enz in Parameters (journal), a publication of the U.S. Army War College:
Thus, that Prevost withdrew is the unremarkable way that a professor at the US military's own war college describes the situation. We could reword as "American victory (marine), British withdrawal (ground)" or similar, to distinguish the dependency of the latter on the former. --
Dhartung |
Talk
14:49, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
I must say this should be left simply as "American Victory". Winston Churchill called it a decisive American victory, but lets save that for another day. ( Red4tribe ( talk) 17:57, 21 April 2008 (UTC))
It seems to me as if this article is somewhat biased in its summary, since the statement that the Battle of Plattsburgh resulted in the repulse of British invasions implies that hostilities in the War of 1812 were initiated by the British.
In fact, the U.S. declared war first on the British on June 18, 1812, with expressed intentions of attacking and occupying parts of Upper and Lower Canada. The operations on Lake Champlain and near Plattsburgh were part of the War of 1812, as Plattsburgh had been used as a starting point for U.S. troops unsuccessful attack on Montreal earlier.
To me the article comes across as having a bias for the U.S. POV Verum non in verbis ( talk) 19:22, 15 October 2011 (UTC) James
The lines, "Captain Daniel Pring, the commander of the gunboats, set up a battery on Isle La Motte, Vermont. This was the first time a British force had stepped foot onto Vermont soil, and the Vermonters swarmed across the lake to Plattsburgh's defenses." seem a little simplistic, and need to be clarified and expanded.
In the first place, I'm sure that British ships and marines raided several settlements on the Vermont shores of Lake Champlain during the summer of 1813. In the second, the paragraph reads as if, having spent the previous years selling cattle, flour, salt and naval stores to the British, the Vermonters declared some sort of Holy War to expel the British from the sacred soil of one small island.
This part of the article ought to be expanded and clarified by someone better informed on the history of Vermont than I am. HLGallon ( talk) 14:15, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
The statement "This was the first time a British force had stepped foot onto Vermont soil" is definately incorrect. As HLGallon stated, the British conducted an operation known as "Murray's Raid" which lasted from July 29th - August 3rd of 1813. Col. John Murray, commander of the British garrison at St. John's, Quebec, led a force comprised of 2 sloops, three galleys, and some 47 bateaux laden with 900 soldiers, sailors, and Marines into Lake Champlain with orders to destroy all military storehouses, barracks, etc. and capture or destroy any stores or boats that could be used by the enemy. The raiders burned a blockhouse and armory in Plattsburgh, and captured several merchant ships and their cargo near Burlington, Vermont. On their return trip up the lake, troops were landed in Vermont on August 2nd at Maquam Bay where they marched to Swanton, Vermont. There they destroyed a barracks, a hospital, and several other government buildings before marching back to their boats. It was at Swanton that depositions were taken following the raid accusing the British of rape and attempted rape of local women. After more destruction of a blockhouse and barracks the following day in Champlain, New York, the raiders finally returned to Canada.-- SmedleyButler ( talk) 01:05, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
An editor has been inserting presumed relatives into battle articles. We now have:
"led by Captain Mcglassin and 50 Americans". Why is Captain Mcglassin's contribution so notable that his name is there? He has no article. The contribution to the battle was slight. The officer who sent this detachment was more notable IMO. The "leading" part was a bit incidental IMO.
Isn't there a Wikipolicy about sticking random names in articles? Student7 ( talk) 13:35, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
The image from the infobox has been dropped. It might also be good to insert the Reverse of the Congressional Gold Medal given to Alexander Macomb (American general), if somebody knows how to do that and where to find it. 7&6=thirteen ( talk) 15:34, 7 September 2008 (UTC) Stan
How about a map of the overall area, and one specifically of the forces and battles? This seems like a glaring and obvious omission for military battles articles in which area geography is so important to following along. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.127.98 ( talk) 19:57, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Not sure why article is named "Battle of Plattsburgh" except as a chamber of commerce thing or to pov overemphasize the army's contribution. When the naval battle was concluded, prior to the opening of army hostilities, that was the end. There was, essentially, no land battle to speak of. This is why there were three ships named "Lake Champlain" and none named "Plattsburgh." I would like to see the article name changed to the more common one. Student7 ( talk) 18:33, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
The Americans won the battle, no question. But "decisive" needs a citation, as does the claim of the effects on the negotiaions. Wikipedia has too few articles that quote a result, and its usually left to joe public to decide what type of victory it is. This is not good. Find a citation for "decisive". Dapi89 ( talk) 17:35, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Okay. I would raher it be called; Victory with decisive political results. As militarily it was less decisive in determining the outcome of the 'shooting' conflict. Dapi89 ( talk) 13:10, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
I'm going to have to side with Mr. Gallon on this one, it was a decisive battle in that it completely wrapped up military operations on that area and led both sides to agree that no successful outcome to the war was likely. Tirronan ( talk) 13:46, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Battle of Plattsburgh. 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:
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:52, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on September 11, 2014. |
First let me say that this is a superb article. But it is seriously marred by the fact that it lists no references. And some statements need inline citations (For example, the quotes from Roosevelt and Churchill both need a citation.) I know there was a great book all about the battle that came out a few years ago (entitled something like "The Last Invasion"... but I may be remembering wrong)... I will look into that and add it if I can track it down. I hope others will do the same. Blueboar 19:42, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
It seems clear enough to me that the British were defeated on the lake, but withdrew on land. There were two separate battles, one of which was a decisive victory for the US, and the other of which was handed to them without significant engagement. This is a review of The Final Invasion: Plattsburgh, the War of 1812’s Most Decisive Battle by David G. Fitz-Enz in Parameters (journal), a publication of the U.S. Army War College:
Thus, that Prevost withdrew is the unremarkable way that a professor at the US military's own war college describes the situation. We could reword as "American victory (marine), British withdrawal (ground)" or similar, to distinguish the dependency of the latter on the former. --
Dhartung |
Talk
14:49, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
I must say this should be left simply as "American Victory". Winston Churchill called it a decisive American victory, but lets save that for another day. ( Red4tribe ( talk) 17:57, 21 April 2008 (UTC))
It seems to me as if this article is somewhat biased in its summary, since the statement that the Battle of Plattsburgh resulted in the repulse of British invasions implies that hostilities in the War of 1812 were initiated by the British.
In fact, the U.S. declared war first on the British on June 18, 1812, with expressed intentions of attacking and occupying parts of Upper and Lower Canada. The operations on Lake Champlain and near Plattsburgh were part of the War of 1812, as Plattsburgh had been used as a starting point for U.S. troops unsuccessful attack on Montreal earlier.
To me the article comes across as having a bias for the U.S. POV Verum non in verbis ( talk) 19:22, 15 October 2011 (UTC) James
The lines, "Captain Daniel Pring, the commander of the gunboats, set up a battery on Isle La Motte, Vermont. This was the first time a British force had stepped foot onto Vermont soil, and the Vermonters swarmed across the lake to Plattsburgh's defenses." seem a little simplistic, and need to be clarified and expanded.
In the first place, I'm sure that British ships and marines raided several settlements on the Vermont shores of Lake Champlain during the summer of 1813. In the second, the paragraph reads as if, having spent the previous years selling cattle, flour, salt and naval stores to the British, the Vermonters declared some sort of Holy War to expel the British from the sacred soil of one small island.
This part of the article ought to be expanded and clarified by someone better informed on the history of Vermont than I am. HLGallon ( talk) 14:15, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
The statement "This was the first time a British force had stepped foot onto Vermont soil" is definately incorrect. As HLGallon stated, the British conducted an operation known as "Murray's Raid" which lasted from July 29th - August 3rd of 1813. Col. John Murray, commander of the British garrison at St. John's, Quebec, led a force comprised of 2 sloops, three galleys, and some 47 bateaux laden with 900 soldiers, sailors, and Marines into Lake Champlain with orders to destroy all military storehouses, barracks, etc. and capture or destroy any stores or boats that could be used by the enemy. The raiders burned a blockhouse and armory in Plattsburgh, and captured several merchant ships and their cargo near Burlington, Vermont. On their return trip up the lake, troops were landed in Vermont on August 2nd at Maquam Bay where they marched to Swanton, Vermont. There they destroyed a barracks, a hospital, and several other government buildings before marching back to their boats. It was at Swanton that depositions were taken following the raid accusing the British of rape and attempted rape of local women. After more destruction of a blockhouse and barracks the following day in Champlain, New York, the raiders finally returned to Canada.-- SmedleyButler ( talk) 01:05, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
An editor has been inserting presumed relatives into battle articles. We now have:
"led by Captain Mcglassin and 50 Americans". Why is Captain Mcglassin's contribution so notable that his name is there? He has no article. The contribution to the battle was slight. The officer who sent this detachment was more notable IMO. The "leading" part was a bit incidental IMO.
Isn't there a Wikipolicy about sticking random names in articles? Student7 ( talk) 13:35, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
The image from the infobox has been dropped. It might also be good to insert the Reverse of the Congressional Gold Medal given to Alexander Macomb (American general), if somebody knows how to do that and where to find it. 7&6=thirteen ( talk) 15:34, 7 September 2008 (UTC) Stan
How about a map of the overall area, and one specifically of the forces and battles? This seems like a glaring and obvious omission for military battles articles in which area geography is so important to following along. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.127.98 ( talk) 19:57, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Not sure why article is named "Battle of Plattsburgh" except as a chamber of commerce thing or to pov overemphasize the army's contribution. When the naval battle was concluded, prior to the opening of army hostilities, that was the end. There was, essentially, no land battle to speak of. This is why there were three ships named "Lake Champlain" and none named "Plattsburgh." I would like to see the article name changed to the more common one. Student7 ( talk) 18:33, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
The Americans won the battle, no question. But "decisive" needs a citation, as does the claim of the effects on the negotiaions. Wikipedia has too few articles that quote a result, and its usually left to joe public to decide what type of victory it is. This is not good. Find a citation for "decisive". Dapi89 ( talk) 17:35, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Okay. I would raher it be called; Victory with decisive political results. As militarily it was less decisive in determining the outcome of the 'shooting' conflict. Dapi89 ( talk) 13:10, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
I'm going to have to side with Mr. Gallon on this one, it was a decisive battle in that it completely wrapped up military operations on that area and led both sides to agree that no successful outcome to the war was likely. Tirronan ( talk) 13:46, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Battle of Plattsburgh. 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:
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:52, 16 July 2017 (UTC)