![]() | This Military history WikiProject page is an archive, log collection, or currently inactive page; it is kept primarily for historical interest. | ![]() |
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | → | Archive 5 |
This page is an Archive of the discussions from
WikiProject Military history/American Civil War task force talk page (Discussion page).
![]() |
---|
I'm kicking off in the most logical place I can find by placing {{WPMILHIST|class=Start|ACW-task-force=yes}} on Talk:Timeline of events leading to the American Civil War. • CQ 20:47, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm proposing that we begin a timeline along the principles outlined at Grand Unified Timeline of Human History geared to "plug in" to the timeline shown on Portal:United States. This timeline will be grafted onto the Timeline of events leading to the American Civil War.
We have started a micro-version of this sort of timeline at Kentucky in the Civil War/Timeline. I would like to produce a Timeline of the American Civil War as a master document that can include, exclude and transclude elements from smaller, more detailed timelines. There might also be a Timeline of the Aftermath of the American Civil War or Timeline of the Reconstruction (American Civil War) or some such timeline.
I would also like to make a large master map and submaps that show where rivers, railways, forts, battlefields and other geographical points can be seen and expanded or contracted by both readers and editors. This is an ambitious and crazy idea, I know.
Next, is a comprehensive treatment of personalities, by allegience (North|South|Neutral), by state, unit or whatever from a biographical perspective. The List of American Civil War leaders probably exists in some form that I am not yet aware of.
My philosophy is to find, catalog, expand, contract and refine existing articles and resources before creating new ones that are most likely redundant. Brother against brother is an example of a new article concerning border state issues that is supplimental to Wikipedia's treatment of the American Civil War.
Lots of work is here for this taskforce. I'm interested enough to chip away at it and look forward to collaborative efforts to Git 'er done. • CQ 21:41, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
see articles marked with the Needed class? I was browsing the new article category and saw the Virginia in the Civil War talk page which was marked as needed. How do I find others marked similarly? plange 04:15, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
I marked These pages with the non-implemented "Needed-Class" tag:
We should probably discuss if they are "needed" or not. The point to what I was doing was to see what states were using the "[Some State] in the Civil War" naming scheme for separate articles of this type, and if other naming conventions exist. I'm here from Wikipedia:WikiProject Kentucky and Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. states. See Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. states/Matrix. CQ 16:46, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Just finished populating this category, will turn my attention to Delaware and Minnesota next, then probably Maryland. I have already created and populated 8 Northern states' categories. Scott Mingus 19:24, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Something to consider: is it really necessary for a single article to have (a) its own campaignbox and (b) its own category? Perhaps these are merely placeholders for more articles yet to come; but, given how thorough the coverage of the ACW seems to be, I suspect that this isn't the case.
I would suggest that a comprehensive review of the category and campaignbox structure of the war may be advisable at this point. Both the templates and the categories are intended primarily as navigational tools, but have been broken down very minutely by using "official" campaign designations exclusively. I think it might be better to merge related categories and templates; otherwise, they're not all that useful. The "correct" campaigns can, of course, be indicated within the relevant articles; but there's no reason, in my opinion, why we cannot group related operations together for the purpose of making navigation easier for the reader. Kirill Lokshin 20:16, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
I've created a userbox for this task force at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Outreach/User WPMILHIST American Civil War task force, if anyone would like to use one. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 04:29, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
I've talked to a Civil War historian about various topics, and Shelby Foote has come up on various occasions. This historian says that Foote's books don't provide sources and are thus considered fiction by many historians. Therefore, should we not be using his books as sources? This is certainly a subject that should be carefully sourced, IMHO. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 18:11, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
I saw some comment that Idaho in the Civil War may be a temporary category. I STRONGLY object to eliminating or combining the states categories, as that's the way many people search for information - from their own state, not from a particular campaign. Keep the states. Scott Mingus 23:52, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
I experimented in the new Texas in the Civil War article that I am working on by adding the campaign boxes specific to battles in that state. Not sure if I like this, but I stuck them in anyway. Do folks like this approach, and should it be continued for other "<State> in the Civil War" articles? Also, feel free to add more text to the Texas article. The Mississippi one needs a lot of attention ( Mississippi in the Civil War as I merely copied a couple sentences from the parent article. Scott Mingus 00:09, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Maybe {{ American Civil War}} can be replaced in all instances by {{Portal|American Civil War}}.. • CQ 18:50, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
I created and populated Category:Maryland in the Civil War, as well as populating Category:Tennessee in the Civil War and Category:Washington, D.C. in the Civil War. I also finished populating Category:Texas in the Civil War. I normally add the major politicians, generals and naval officers from the state, significant places / battles, and related articles. Scott Mingus 01:12, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure if it's any help, however I've created at missing topics list based on Clifford L. Linedecker's Civil War, A to Z: The Complete Handbook to America's Bloodiest Conflict. I'm still cleaning the page up bit by bit, however I certainly invite everyone to take a look. MadMax 22:26, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
I've been beefing up the list of Task Force requested articles by copying red links from various list pages. I've come acoss a couple of things which bear thought by the community. First is this issue of whether battles should be listed as First Bull Run and Second Bull Run or Bull Run I and Bull Run II. I'm not trying to stir up controversy, and perhaps there's a guideline which no one is using I haven't yet read. Yet before we write a bunch of requested articles, it would be good if at least we knew which direction the community wanted to go. We follow both formats amongst a dozen or so articles. Then we could cleanup pretty quickly. BusterD 13:11, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
I recently started an article on German-Americans in the Civil War and I was curious if it might be useful to create a wider range of articles dealing with ethnic groups (Irish, Scandinavian, etc.) during the period in a similar fashion as states during the Civil War ? MadMax 01:56, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Somebody started putting that tag into articles, so I went ahead and made the category page. Feel free to populate. Stilgar135 14:44, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Can anyone verify the information added in recent edits to Military history of African Americans#African Americans in the Confederate Military (see [1]) ? The edits were made by an anonymous user, and parts of the new info are quite different than what was previously there. Also a few NPOV issues, I think. -- Jwillbur 23:36, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
new ACW task force Userbox!
--
Fix Bayonets!
12:18, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
A few of us have been trying to reduce the number of entries into the once overly massive category. It's now been effectively broken into much more specific categories. HMains added Category:Bushwackers and Category:Union Marines recently, and I just added Category:American Civil War industrialists for those arms makers and other business people that were previously merely Civil War people. I also created Category:Native Americans in the Civil War. As you create biographies in the future, please try to use the specific categories instead of the broader more generic American Civil War or American Civil War people. Thanks! Scott Mingus 12:26, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
I have created and populated several Ohio in the Civil War related articles with a new template that I created, Template:Ohio in the Civil War. This is modeled after User:Americasroof's Template:Missouri in the Civil War. I will create a similar one for Pennsylvania (my current state of residence) when I get the time and inclination to do so. Scott Mingus 03:37, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
I added Category:U.S. cities in the American Civil War to be consistent with the state category. I copied the Civil War text from a few individual city articles into a separate ACW-related article as a starting place for further expansion and text addition. I merely added a header paragaph (for example, see New Orleans in the Civil War). I added similar articles for Savannah, Charleston, Atlanta, Richmond, etc., joining my previous articles on Cleveland and St. Louis, and ones from other folks. Please, please, please add suitable text and edits to these articles to better flesh them out, as this was a mere starting point. Scott Mingus 00:02, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
Just wanted to let everyone know-- Wikipedia:Featured article review/Abraham Lincoln — Preceding unsigned comment added by Plange ( talk • contribs)
Stevie and I were talking about this on his talk page, and he suggested asking here. The question was breaking the Category:Kentucky in the Civil War down into subcats Kentucky People in the Confederacy and Kentucky People in the Federal Service or something akin to that. What is the general consense of this idea? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soldan ( talk • contribs)
Due to time constraints and wiki-burnout, I'm withdrawing from this project. I will continue to watch and develop Louisville in the Civil War (and a couple other Civil War-related articles) however. Good luck for the future, and Cheers! Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 22:08, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Category:Battle Fields of the Gettysburg Campaign of the American Civil War - not sure why this category was created since we already have a cat for the battles of the campaign. I recommend deletion - any other thoughts? Scott Mingus 17:48, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
I have created a list of some of the leading Confederate generals that still do not yet have articles on Wikipedia. It can be found at User:Scott Mingus/sandbox for now. When I finish the Union list, I will republish these as a separate article / list. Feel free to work on any of these topics, or add generals that I have missed. Scott Mingus 03:46, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
Re: Battle of Westport, I've boldly asserted that this conflict was the largest single combat engagement west of the Mississippi in American History. Could someone dispute this and prove me wrong? Largest alternate is Battle of Contreras, and that's several thousand short. BusterD 15:48, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Anyone have the OR handy? I wanted to see if an individual was in there before I made the trek to the Univerity library that has these. Of course only if you have them at your fingertips... Person is John W. Johnston a.k.a. John Warfield Johnston. Was apparently the Confederate States Receiver? Thanks! -- plange 16:58, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
There's a new peer review request for Battle of Raymond that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated. Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 02:51, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 21:30, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
In looking through a few different category and list pages for Civil War regiments, I noticed that, even within the USA, for example, there is no standard presentation for regiment names. Does this variation actually reflect variation in how these units were officially designated while in active service during the Civil War? If not, what would be the most apropos standardized format? From the USA standpoint, it would probably be however the US Army designated each regiment in official fashion. For the CSA, either CSA official designation or each individual state's own official designation would suffice, I'd guess. Any suggestions? Dogface 16:59, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
There's a new peer review request for Coal torpedo that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated. Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 03:19, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
There's a new peer review request for Union Army Balloon Corps that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated. Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 23:33, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Fellow ACW editors, I have at the suggestion of Hal Jespersen ( User:Hlj) created a new article, Infantry in the American Civil War. Please have a look at this, and feel free to aggressively polish and edit it to improve it. I intended it to be a baseline for further efforts. Thanks in advance! Scott Mingus 01:32, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
Hal created a very good style guide some time ago (see User:Hlj/CWediting). I propose that the ACW Task Force formally adopt Hal's guidelines for maintenance of existing articles and creation of new ones, and police our watchlists accordingly. If agreeable to everyone, I will copy his guideline to a new subpage of this task force, remove the first person references, spruce it up just a wee bit, and link it to our main page. Sound OK? Any other style guidelines that we should add, or anything to be changed or omitted? Thanks! (off to nearby Gettysburg now for the annual reenactors parade and Remembrance Day celebrations!) My only minor exception with Hal's list (and it's a very minor nit) is that the Union army did not officially use the Roman numerals to designate the corps until after the war, and they are rarely used in the ORs, instead being spelled out (First Army Corps or First Corps). Scott Mingus 13:24, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
<div class="references-small"><references/></div>
.Hello. Apparently, members of this WikiProject were unaware of the recent consensus at CFD to rename "U.S. States in the Civil War" categories. I am alerting you per request of WikiProject member Scott Mingus ( talk • contribs). Any problems, drop me a note on my talk. -- RobertG ♬ talk 17:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
May God Bless You Always!
I need a little help. I was working with the American Civil War Articles and noticed a probelm. Kansas was involve in the American Civil War and has and article in Wikipedia discussing its involvment. Kansas in the Civil War. However, Kansas is not listed in the American Civil War as a state involved. I want to edit this and add Kansas, but cannot find the American Civil War Template. Please help.
Yours in Christ, (
Steve
18:12, 9 December 2006 (UTC))
Thanks you for the help. I was able to make the edit. Thanks again!
God Bless, ( Steve 18:38, 9 December 2006 (UTC))
The categories for World Wars I and II, Vietnam, and Korea were fairly well filled out, but there was no category for ACW. A handful of general were listed under the parent category Category:American military personnel killed in action, so I created a new Category: American Civil War killed in action and began to populate it with the first 90 or so articles. Feel free to add to this cat, and remember to use it for future articles you write or edit if the subject fits. By the way, I did NOT include Stonewall Jackson in this category, as in the opinion of some historians, he died of complications from his wound, not from the wound itself. Hence, I didn't put him in the list (as well as a few others that similarly died of complications). How do you guys feel about Stonewall - KIA??? Scott Mingus 20:40, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
My article on Thaddeus S. C. Lowe received an A from the Bio Project reviewers. Military gave it a B. Could someone on the force please review it for at least a GA rating. It has all the other qualifications fulfilled. Thank you -- Magi Media 03:41, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
This reminds me of Maximillian I of Mexico, where an Austrian prince ended up Emperor of Mexico. What were these French Civil War generals up to!? Camille Armand Jules Marie, Prince de Polignac is a great story. But what I came here to ask is whether anyone knows who these other French Civil War generals were? Bored European aristocrats seeking excitement in a war half a world away? Or what? Carcharoth 01:30, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
I've looked a bit further, and found Category:People of the American Revolution, in which you find people like Prince Whipple, Category:French people of the American Revolution, Category:Hessian mercenaries, Johann de Kalb, Category:Spanish people of the American Revolution. That deals with the American Revolution, though a quick look through Category:Continental Army generals throws up Louis Lebèque Duportail (who I've now added to Category:French people of the American Revolution), and also Tadeusz Kościuszko and Kazimierz Pułaski. I've created Category:Polish people of the American Revolution to put them in. I considered a Category:European people of the American Revolution, but want to exclude Britain as it was one of the main combatants. I'm really looking for a Category:People not from the US or Britain who went to fight in the American Revolutionary War (not a suitable category title), but maybe this is best dealt with by a section in the American Revolutionary War article, telling the stirring story of how soldiers and officer from across Europe converged on the colonies to fight in this war. The closest thing I could find was Military leadership in the American Revolutionary War, but I haven't checked to see if that includes all the above. I think most of them are, but Duportail at least is missing. I guess what I am looking for is something similar, if it exists, for the US Civil War. I found Military leadership in the American Civil War, but Camille Armand Jules Marie, Prince de Polignac was not listed at Military leadership in the American Civil War#Native American and international officers in Confederate Army (I added him), though both that and Military leadership in the American Civil War#Native American and international officers in Union Army are, finally, what I was looking for! Philippe, comte de Paris and Régis de Trobriand. It did take me a while though. Was I just looking in the wrong place (the categories), or could the linkage and cohesion of the coverage of international participation in these two conflicts be improved? In particular Category:People of the American Civil War could do with some 'People of...' subcategories for non-US people. For Ireland we have Michael Corcoran, Thomas Francis Meagher, and Patrick Cleburne. for Germany we have Carl Schurz and Franz Sigel. For France the three mentioned above: Philippe, comte de Paris, Régis de Trobriand, and Camille Armand Jules Marie, Prince de Polignac. Any others? Carcharoth 11:47, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Sorry for not limiting my ramblings to manageable proportions (though note that I actually did a bit of tidying up as I was writing the above stuff). How about I just throw up one question for now: Juan de Lángara is in Category:Spanish people of the American Revolution, but the article doesn't mention this. What is going on here? Is something missing or lost from the article, or is this just a misapplied category? Hope that question is well-defined enough. Carcharoth 02:10, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
I am in the midst of research on Winchester during the War of Northern Aggression (Civil War) in regard to occupation timelines and events. I came across some errors on the Wikipedia pages regarding events in Winchester, as well as a mis-named battle for the Third Battle of Winchester (erroneously refered to by it's estoeric name of Battle of Opequon). Subsequently I've been told that local, regional and state naming conventions for this battle are to be disregarded in lieu of a National Park Service so-called convention.
I have double checked, and found no NPS presence in regards to the Battles of Winchester, but could be mistaken. Ownership of battlefields and forts has been made independently of any NPS involvement. Therefore, future preservation efforts are very unlikely to refer to this as the Battle of Opequon.
Furthermore, within the Commonwealth of Virginia, home to the majority of the actions of the War of Northern Aggression, the state has generally taken the perogative to name the battles in accord with the records of the Provisional Army of the Confederate States and the CS government. Thus the First and Second Battles of Manassas are called such. In regard to battles outside of the Commonwealth of Virginia and outside of the formerly seceded States, such as Maryland, they name their internal battles as they see fit, and so the Battle of Antietam is such, and not the Battle of Sharpsburg.
The "Battle of Opequon" is fairly nonsensical as well for the Northern States name, as the Opequon is not even close to Winchester, and rather forms the eastern boundary of this county, Frederick Co., VA. The Federals should have named it the Battle of Red Bud Run. Regardless, all battles in Virginia are not known by water-names (e.g. its the Battle of Fredericksburg, not the Battle of the Rappahannock, and so on).
Therefore, until such time that the NPS decides to spend money and preserve the battlefields of Winchester, the naming convention for battlefields within the Commonwealth (other than NPS sites) generally falls to Virgnia, and even then I don't believe NPS has named any sites against Virginia's tradition, but I could be mistaken.
Furthermore, I suggest that the Wikipedia page for the Third Battle of Winchester be named so, and the virtually unused and unknown name of "Battle of Opequon" be dropped in deference.
Meanwhile, as I can get the free time, I will offer inputs to the pages on Winchester's local battles, to bring them up to snuff and reasonable accuracy, and will try to include Occupation of Winchester history, perhaps which can be made into its own page, covering events such as the oppression suffered under Banks, his subordinates, and later under "My will is absolute law" Milroy and finally under Sheridon and Scott, etc.
These battles in Winchester are very under-rated, but were all crucial battles to overall Lee srategy to extend the war and threaten the Northern States with pathways of counter-invasion. The Second Battle of Winchester is likely the most lop-sided victory of any battle in the war, and the most brilliantly executed.
Thank you for your consideration
Grahghost01 27 February 2007 (UTC)
There's a new request for A-Class status for American Civil War that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated. Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 19:30, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
See Winchester in the Civil War, a new article just pulled together by User:Grayghost01 from the larger article on the modern city of Winchester, Virginia.
Any other prominent cities that should over time be added? User:Hlj at one time mentioned the possibility of a separate article on Gettysburg in the war (broader than just the 1863 battle), but I have yet to take the time to do so.
Scott Mingus 18:35, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
As an ongoing part of my work to expand, improve, and create Ohio-related Civil War articles for Wikipedia, I have recently created Cincinnati in the Civil War. I will continue to polish this article as time allows, but feel free to have a look at it and make suggestions as to further improvements or additions. I grew up in southern Ohio, went to college there, and still spend a few days each month there on business. Scott Mingus 14:43, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
There's a new request for A-Class status for American Civil War that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated. Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 12:32, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Permission has been granted by the artist John Paul Strain to use a digital copy of his painting, The Romney Expedition, and it is currently used in the Romney Expedition article. We graciously thank Mr. Strain for the use of his image. Anyone who desires to use images of any of Mr. Strain's artwork, please contact him through his website at www.johnpaulstrain.com [2]
Permission has been granted by Paul at www.sonofthesouth.net [3] to use a reduced (300 pixel wide) version of his digitally mastered scan of his graphic of Winchester, Virginia from page 569 of Harper's Weekly, September 7, 1861, which is found in two articles: Winchester in the Civil War and Romney Expedition. He has not released permission to use any of his high-quality print worthy images located at his website, and asks the help of our Task Force to prevent the unauthorized use of his high quality images. If you see any of those, please assist by tagging those files for deletion. Paul's scans and digital mastering is noted by its high quality and sepia-toned false coloring which distinguishes it from other scans of Harper's Weekly. We graciously thank Paul for the use of his image. Anyone who desires to use images of any of Paul's artwork, please contact him through his website.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Grayghost01 ( talk • contribs)
Hello,
I just joined the American Civil War task force.
Before I joined this task force, I already made some articles about Civil War soldiers and the wives.
Here they are:
Soldiers
Wives
Unfortunately, many of these articles are only stubs. Any additional information in these articles would be appreciated.
Thanks!
Psdubow 22:33, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
P.S. - Please leave replies on my talkpage.
New article - feel free to expand... Harrisburg in the Civil War
Scott Mingus 01:44, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
As a first step to expanding a few articles about the defenses of Washington, D.C., I created a little infobox to go at the bottom of the articles. I'm having a problem lining up the information the way I want, however. Is there a way I can force the template to not insert a return in the southeast and northeast quadrant sections? Thanks in advance. JKBrooks85 19:38, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks to user Hlj for the help! JKBrooks85 20:05, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
There's a new peer review request for Fort Kearny (Washington D.C.) that may be of interest to you; any input there would be appreciated. Thanks! Kirill 23:20, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
My featured article nomination of Confederate government of Kentucky is off to kind of a rough start. One reviewer has suggested that the lead needs to be reworked and that the prose is "unencyclopedic." Having created the article and done much of the editing on it, I think I'm too close to the prose to see the problems. Could interested editors please help me address the issues? Thanks. Acdixon 16:22, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
In looking through the vast listing of red-linked articles that have been requested, I note that few are really worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia compendium such as Wikipedia. Many are rather trivial, or are better covered as subsets of more general topics. Could this list be pared down to the critical few that folks can really work on, rather than this catch-all list? 8th Ohio Volunteers 18:37, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
There's a new peer review request for Hugh Boyle Ewing that may be of interest to you; any input there would be appreciated. Thanks! Kirill 03:45, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
There's a new peer review request for John Watts de Peyster that may be of interest to you; any input there would be appreciated. Thanks! Kirill 03:45, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Greetings from Wikipedia:WikiProject Disambiguation! I just disambiguated [[ partisan]]. I did not find an article on Confederate partisans (I looked) so the Confederate uses are now linked to [[ Partisan (military)]]. That's a generic article, and it's certainly not wrong, but there were so many Confederate references it is clear that "partisan" has a specific meaning in the context of the American Civil War, so there ought to be a specific article. — Randall Bart (talk) 05:46, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
There's a new peer review request for Johnston de Peyster that may be of interest to you; any input there would be appreciated. Thanks! Kirill 01:04, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
![]() | This Military history WikiProject page is an archive, log collection, or currently inactive page; it is kept primarily for historical interest. | ![]() |
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | → | Archive 5 |
This page is an Archive of the discussions from
WikiProject Military history/American Civil War task force talk page (Discussion page).
![]() |
---|
I'm kicking off in the most logical place I can find by placing {{WPMILHIST|class=Start|ACW-task-force=yes}} on Talk:Timeline of events leading to the American Civil War. • CQ 20:47, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm proposing that we begin a timeline along the principles outlined at Grand Unified Timeline of Human History geared to "plug in" to the timeline shown on Portal:United States. This timeline will be grafted onto the Timeline of events leading to the American Civil War.
We have started a micro-version of this sort of timeline at Kentucky in the Civil War/Timeline. I would like to produce a Timeline of the American Civil War as a master document that can include, exclude and transclude elements from smaller, more detailed timelines. There might also be a Timeline of the Aftermath of the American Civil War or Timeline of the Reconstruction (American Civil War) or some such timeline.
I would also like to make a large master map and submaps that show where rivers, railways, forts, battlefields and other geographical points can be seen and expanded or contracted by both readers and editors. This is an ambitious and crazy idea, I know.
Next, is a comprehensive treatment of personalities, by allegience (North|South|Neutral), by state, unit or whatever from a biographical perspective. The List of American Civil War leaders probably exists in some form that I am not yet aware of.
My philosophy is to find, catalog, expand, contract and refine existing articles and resources before creating new ones that are most likely redundant. Brother against brother is an example of a new article concerning border state issues that is supplimental to Wikipedia's treatment of the American Civil War.
Lots of work is here for this taskforce. I'm interested enough to chip away at it and look forward to collaborative efforts to Git 'er done. • CQ 21:41, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
see articles marked with the Needed class? I was browsing the new article category and saw the Virginia in the Civil War talk page which was marked as needed. How do I find others marked similarly? plange 04:15, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
I marked These pages with the non-implemented "Needed-Class" tag:
We should probably discuss if they are "needed" or not. The point to what I was doing was to see what states were using the "[Some State] in the Civil War" naming scheme for separate articles of this type, and if other naming conventions exist. I'm here from Wikipedia:WikiProject Kentucky and Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. states. See Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. states/Matrix. CQ 16:46, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Just finished populating this category, will turn my attention to Delaware and Minnesota next, then probably Maryland. I have already created and populated 8 Northern states' categories. Scott Mingus 19:24, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Something to consider: is it really necessary for a single article to have (a) its own campaignbox and (b) its own category? Perhaps these are merely placeholders for more articles yet to come; but, given how thorough the coverage of the ACW seems to be, I suspect that this isn't the case.
I would suggest that a comprehensive review of the category and campaignbox structure of the war may be advisable at this point. Both the templates and the categories are intended primarily as navigational tools, but have been broken down very minutely by using "official" campaign designations exclusively. I think it might be better to merge related categories and templates; otherwise, they're not all that useful. The "correct" campaigns can, of course, be indicated within the relevant articles; but there's no reason, in my opinion, why we cannot group related operations together for the purpose of making navigation easier for the reader. Kirill Lokshin 20:16, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
I've created a userbox for this task force at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Outreach/User WPMILHIST American Civil War task force, if anyone would like to use one. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 04:29, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
I've talked to a Civil War historian about various topics, and Shelby Foote has come up on various occasions. This historian says that Foote's books don't provide sources and are thus considered fiction by many historians. Therefore, should we not be using his books as sources? This is certainly a subject that should be carefully sourced, IMHO. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 18:11, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
I saw some comment that Idaho in the Civil War may be a temporary category. I STRONGLY object to eliminating or combining the states categories, as that's the way many people search for information - from their own state, not from a particular campaign. Keep the states. Scott Mingus 23:52, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
I experimented in the new Texas in the Civil War article that I am working on by adding the campaign boxes specific to battles in that state. Not sure if I like this, but I stuck them in anyway. Do folks like this approach, and should it be continued for other "<State> in the Civil War" articles? Also, feel free to add more text to the Texas article. The Mississippi one needs a lot of attention ( Mississippi in the Civil War as I merely copied a couple sentences from the parent article. Scott Mingus 00:09, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Maybe {{ American Civil War}} can be replaced in all instances by {{Portal|American Civil War}}.. • CQ 18:50, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
I created and populated Category:Maryland in the Civil War, as well as populating Category:Tennessee in the Civil War and Category:Washington, D.C. in the Civil War. I also finished populating Category:Texas in the Civil War. I normally add the major politicians, generals and naval officers from the state, significant places / battles, and related articles. Scott Mingus 01:12, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure if it's any help, however I've created at missing topics list based on Clifford L. Linedecker's Civil War, A to Z: The Complete Handbook to America's Bloodiest Conflict. I'm still cleaning the page up bit by bit, however I certainly invite everyone to take a look. MadMax 22:26, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
I've been beefing up the list of Task Force requested articles by copying red links from various list pages. I've come acoss a couple of things which bear thought by the community. First is this issue of whether battles should be listed as First Bull Run and Second Bull Run or Bull Run I and Bull Run II. I'm not trying to stir up controversy, and perhaps there's a guideline which no one is using I haven't yet read. Yet before we write a bunch of requested articles, it would be good if at least we knew which direction the community wanted to go. We follow both formats amongst a dozen or so articles. Then we could cleanup pretty quickly. BusterD 13:11, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
I recently started an article on German-Americans in the Civil War and I was curious if it might be useful to create a wider range of articles dealing with ethnic groups (Irish, Scandinavian, etc.) during the period in a similar fashion as states during the Civil War ? MadMax 01:56, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Somebody started putting that tag into articles, so I went ahead and made the category page. Feel free to populate. Stilgar135 14:44, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Can anyone verify the information added in recent edits to Military history of African Americans#African Americans in the Confederate Military (see [1]) ? The edits were made by an anonymous user, and parts of the new info are quite different than what was previously there. Also a few NPOV issues, I think. -- Jwillbur 23:36, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
new ACW task force Userbox!
--
Fix Bayonets!
12:18, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
A few of us have been trying to reduce the number of entries into the once overly massive category. It's now been effectively broken into much more specific categories. HMains added Category:Bushwackers and Category:Union Marines recently, and I just added Category:American Civil War industrialists for those arms makers and other business people that were previously merely Civil War people. I also created Category:Native Americans in the Civil War. As you create biographies in the future, please try to use the specific categories instead of the broader more generic American Civil War or American Civil War people. Thanks! Scott Mingus 12:26, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
I have created and populated several Ohio in the Civil War related articles with a new template that I created, Template:Ohio in the Civil War. This is modeled after User:Americasroof's Template:Missouri in the Civil War. I will create a similar one for Pennsylvania (my current state of residence) when I get the time and inclination to do so. Scott Mingus 03:37, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
I added Category:U.S. cities in the American Civil War to be consistent with the state category. I copied the Civil War text from a few individual city articles into a separate ACW-related article as a starting place for further expansion and text addition. I merely added a header paragaph (for example, see New Orleans in the Civil War). I added similar articles for Savannah, Charleston, Atlanta, Richmond, etc., joining my previous articles on Cleveland and St. Louis, and ones from other folks. Please, please, please add suitable text and edits to these articles to better flesh them out, as this was a mere starting point. Scott Mingus 00:02, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
Just wanted to let everyone know-- Wikipedia:Featured article review/Abraham Lincoln — Preceding unsigned comment added by Plange ( talk • contribs)
Stevie and I were talking about this on his talk page, and he suggested asking here. The question was breaking the Category:Kentucky in the Civil War down into subcats Kentucky People in the Confederacy and Kentucky People in the Federal Service or something akin to that. What is the general consense of this idea? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soldan ( talk • contribs)
Due to time constraints and wiki-burnout, I'm withdrawing from this project. I will continue to watch and develop Louisville in the Civil War (and a couple other Civil War-related articles) however. Good luck for the future, and Cheers! Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 22:08, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Category:Battle Fields of the Gettysburg Campaign of the American Civil War - not sure why this category was created since we already have a cat for the battles of the campaign. I recommend deletion - any other thoughts? Scott Mingus 17:48, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
I have created a list of some of the leading Confederate generals that still do not yet have articles on Wikipedia. It can be found at User:Scott Mingus/sandbox for now. When I finish the Union list, I will republish these as a separate article / list. Feel free to work on any of these topics, or add generals that I have missed. Scott Mingus 03:46, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
Re: Battle of Westport, I've boldly asserted that this conflict was the largest single combat engagement west of the Mississippi in American History. Could someone dispute this and prove me wrong? Largest alternate is Battle of Contreras, and that's several thousand short. BusterD 15:48, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Anyone have the OR handy? I wanted to see if an individual was in there before I made the trek to the Univerity library that has these. Of course only if you have them at your fingertips... Person is John W. Johnston a.k.a. John Warfield Johnston. Was apparently the Confederate States Receiver? Thanks! -- plange 16:58, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
There's a new peer review request for Battle of Raymond that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated. Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 02:51, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 21:30, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
In looking through a few different category and list pages for Civil War regiments, I noticed that, even within the USA, for example, there is no standard presentation for regiment names. Does this variation actually reflect variation in how these units were officially designated while in active service during the Civil War? If not, what would be the most apropos standardized format? From the USA standpoint, it would probably be however the US Army designated each regiment in official fashion. For the CSA, either CSA official designation or each individual state's own official designation would suffice, I'd guess. Any suggestions? Dogface 16:59, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
There's a new peer review request for Coal torpedo that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated. Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 03:19, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
There's a new peer review request for Union Army Balloon Corps that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated. Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 23:33, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Fellow ACW editors, I have at the suggestion of Hal Jespersen ( User:Hlj) created a new article, Infantry in the American Civil War. Please have a look at this, and feel free to aggressively polish and edit it to improve it. I intended it to be a baseline for further efforts. Thanks in advance! Scott Mingus 01:32, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
Hal created a very good style guide some time ago (see User:Hlj/CWediting). I propose that the ACW Task Force formally adopt Hal's guidelines for maintenance of existing articles and creation of new ones, and police our watchlists accordingly. If agreeable to everyone, I will copy his guideline to a new subpage of this task force, remove the first person references, spruce it up just a wee bit, and link it to our main page. Sound OK? Any other style guidelines that we should add, or anything to be changed or omitted? Thanks! (off to nearby Gettysburg now for the annual reenactors parade and Remembrance Day celebrations!) My only minor exception with Hal's list (and it's a very minor nit) is that the Union army did not officially use the Roman numerals to designate the corps until after the war, and they are rarely used in the ORs, instead being spelled out (First Army Corps or First Corps). Scott Mingus 13:24, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
<div class="references-small"><references/></div>
.Hello. Apparently, members of this WikiProject were unaware of the recent consensus at CFD to rename "U.S. States in the Civil War" categories. I am alerting you per request of WikiProject member Scott Mingus ( talk • contribs). Any problems, drop me a note on my talk. -- RobertG ♬ talk 17:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
May God Bless You Always!
I need a little help. I was working with the American Civil War Articles and noticed a probelm. Kansas was involve in the American Civil War and has and article in Wikipedia discussing its involvment. Kansas in the Civil War. However, Kansas is not listed in the American Civil War as a state involved. I want to edit this and add Kansas, but cannot find the American Civil War Template. Please help.
Yours in Christ, (
Steve
18:12, 9 December 2006 (UTC))
Thanks you for the help. I was able to make the edit. Thanks again!
God Bless, ( Steve 18:38, 9 December 2006 (UTC))
The categories for World Wars I and II, Vietnam, and Korea were fairly well filled out, but there was no category for ACW. A handful of general were listed under the parent category Category:American military personnel killed in action, so I created a new Category: American Civil War killed in action and began to populate it with the first 90 or so articles. Feel free to add to this cat, and remember to use it for future articles you write or edit if the subject fits. By the way, I did NOT include Stonewall Jackson in this category, as in the opinion of some historians, he died of complications from his wound, not from the wound itself. Hence, I didn't put him in the list (as well as a few others that similarly died of complications). How do you guys feel about Stonewall - KIA??? Scott Mingus 20:40, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
My article on Thaddeus S. C. Lowe received an A from the Bio Project reviewers. Military gave it a B. Could someone on the force please review it for at least a GA rating. It has all the other qualifications fulfilled. Thank you -- Magi Media 03:41, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
This reminds me of Maximillian I of Mexico, where an Austrian prince ended up Emperor of Mexico. What were these French Civil War generals up to!? Camille Armand Jules Marie, Prince de Polignac is a great story. But what I came here to ask is whether anyone knows who these other French Civil War generals were? Bored European aristocrats seeking excitement in a war half a world away? Or what? Carcharoth 01:30, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
I've looked a bit further, and found Category:People of the American Revolution, in which you find people like Prince Whipple, Category:French people of the American Revolution, Category:Hessian mercenaries, Johann de Kalb, Category:Spanish people of the American Revolution. That deals with the American Revolution, though a quick look through Category:Continental Army generals throws up Louis Lebèque Duportail (who I've now added to Category:French people of the American Revolution), and also Tadeusz Kościuszko and Kazimierz Pułaski. I've created Category:Polish people of the American Revolution to put them in. I considered a Category:European people of the American Revolution, but want to exclude Britain as it was one of the main combatants. I'm really looking for a Category:People not from the US or Britain who went to fight in the American Revolutionary War (not a suitable category title), but maybe this is best dealt with by a section in the American Revolutionary War article, telling the stirring story of how soldiers and officer from across Europe converged on the colonies to fight in this war. The closest thing I could find was Military leadership in the American Revolutionary War, but I haven't checked to see if that includes all the above. I think most of them are, but Duportail at least is missing. I guess what I am looking for is something similar, if it exists, for the US Civil War. I found Military leadership in the American Civil War, but Camille Armand Jules Marie, Prince de Polignac was not listed at Military leadership in the American Civil War#Native American and international officers in Confederate Army (I added him), though both that and Military leadership in the American Civil War#Native American and international officers in Union Army are, finally, what I was looking for! Philippe, comte de Paris and Régis de Trobriand. It did take me a while though. Was I just looking in the wrong place (the categories), or could the linkage and cohesion of the coverage of international participation in these two conflicts be improved? In particular Category:People of the American Civil War could do with some 'People of...' subcategories for non-US people. For Ireland we have Michael Corcoran, Thomas Francis Meagher, and Patrick Cleburne. for Germany we have Carl Schurz and Franz Sigel. For France the three mentioned above: Philippe, comte de Paris, Régis de Trobriand, and Camille Armand Jules Marie, Prince de Polignac. Any others? Carcharoth 11:47, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Sorry for not limiting my ramblings to manageable proportions (though note that I actually did a bit of tidying up as I was writing the above stuff). How about I just throw up one question for now: Juan de Lángara is in Category:Spanish people of the American Revolution, but the article doesn't mention this. What is going on here? Is something missing or lost from the article, or is this just a misapplied category? Hope that question is well-defined enough. Carcharoth 02:10, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
I am in the midst of research on Winchester during the War of Northern Aggression (Civil War) in regard to occupation timelines and events. I came across some errors on the Wikipedia pages regarding events in Winchester, as well as a mis-named battle for the Third Battle of Winchester (erroneously refered to by it's estoeric name of Battle of Opequon). Subsequently I've been told that local, regional and state naming conventions for this battle are to be disregarded in lieu of a National Park Service so-called convention.
I have double checked, and found no NPS presence in regards to the Battles of Winchester, but could be mistaken. Ownership of battlefields and forts has been made independently of any NPS involvement. Therefore, future preservation efforts are very unlikely to refer to this as the Battle of Opequon.
Furthermore, within the Commonwealth of Virginia, home to the majority of the actions of the War of Northern Aggression, the state has generally taken the perogative to name the battles in accord with the records of the Provisional Army of the Confederate States and the CS government. Thus the First and Second Battles of Manassas are called such. In regard to battles outside of the Commonwealth of Virginia and outside of the formerly seceded States, such as Maryland, they name their internal battles as they see fit, and so the Battle of Antietam is such, and not the Battle of Sharpsburg.
The "Battle of Opequon" is fairly nonsensical as well for the Northern States name, as the Opequon is not even close to Winchester, and rather forms the eastern boundary of this county, Frederick Co., VA. The Federals should have named it the Battle of Red Bud Run. Regardless, all battles in Virginia are not known by water-names (e.g. its the Battle of Fredericksburg, not the Battle of the Rappahannock, and so on).
Therefore, until such time that the NPS decides to spend money and preserve the battlefields of Winchester, the naming convention for battlefields within the Commonwealth (other than NPS sites) generally falls to Virgnia, and even then I don't believe NPS has named any sites against Virginia's tradition, but I could be mistaken.
Furthermore, I suggest that the Wikipedia page for the Third Battle of Winchester be named so, and the virtually unused and unknown name of "Battle of Opequon" be dropped in deference.
Meanwhile, as I can get the free time, I will offer inputs to the pages on Winchester's local battles, to bring them up to snuff and reasonable accuracy, and will try to include Occupation of Winchester history, perhaps which can be made into its own page, covering events such as the oppression suffered under Banks, his subordinates, and later under "My will is absolute law" Milroy and finally under Sheridon and Scott, etc.
These battles in Winchester are very under-rated, but were all crucial battles to overall Lee srategy to extend the war and threaten the Northern States with pathways of counter-invasion. The Second Battle of Winchester is likely the most lop-sided victory of any battle in the war, and the most brilliantly executed.
Thank you for your consideration
Grahghost01 27 February 2007 (UTC)
There's a new request for A-Class status for American Civil War that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated. Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 19:30, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
See Winchester in the Civil War, a new article just pulled together by User:Grayghost01 from the larger article on the modern city of Winchester, Virginia.
Any other prominent cities that should over time be added? User:Hlj at one time mentioned the possibility of a separate article on Gettysburg in the war (broader than just the 1863 battle), but I have yet to take the time to do so.
Scott Mingus 18:35, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
As an ongoing part of my work to expand, improve, and create Ohio-related Civil War articles for Wikipedia, I have recently created Cincinnati in the Civil War. I will continue to polish this article as time allows, but feel free to have a look at it and make suggestions as to further improvements or additions. I grew up in southern Ohio, went to college there, and still spend a few days each month there on business. Scott Mingus 14:43, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
There's a new request for A-Class status for American Civil War that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated. Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 12:32, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Permission has been granted by the artist John Paul Strain to use a digital copy of his painting, The Romney Expedition, and it is currently used in the Romney Expedition article. We graciously thank Mr. Strain for the use of his image. Anyone who desires to use images of any of Mr. Strain's artwork, please contact him through his website at www.johnpaulstrain.com [2]
Permission has been granted by Paul at www.sonofthesouth.net [3] to use a reduced (300 pixel wide) version of his digitally mastered scan of his graphic of Winchester, Virginia from page 569 of Harper's Weekly, September 7, 1861, which is found in two articles: Winchester in the Civil War and Romney Expedition. He has not released permission to use any of his high-quality print worthy images located at his website, and asks the help of our Task Force to prevent the unauthorized use of his high quality images. If you see any of those, please assist by tagging those files for deletion. Paul's scans and digital mastering is noted by its high quality and sepia-toned false coloring which distinguishes it from other scans of Harper's Weekly. We graciously thank Paul for the use of his image. Anyone who desires to use images of any of Paul's artwork, please contact him through his website.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Grayghost01 ( talk • contribs)
Hello,
I just joined the American Civil War task force.
Before I joined this task force, I already made some articles about Civil War soldiers and the wives.
Here they are:
Soldiers
Wives
Unfortunately, many of these articles are only stubs. Any additional information in these articles would be appreciated.
Thanks!
Psdubow 22:33, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
P.S. - Please leave replies on my talkpage.
New article - feel free to expand... Harrisburg in the Civil War
Scott Mingus 01:44, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
As a first step to expanding a few articles about the defenses of Washington, D.C., I created a little infobox to go at the bottom of the articles. I'm having a problem lining up the information the way I want, however. Is there a way I can force the template to not insert a return in the southeast and northeast quadrant sections? Thanks in advance. JKBrooks85 19:38, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks to user Hlj for the help! JKBrooks85 20:05, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
There's a new peer review request for Fort Kearny (Washington D.C.) that may be of interest to you; any input there would be appreciated. Thanks! Kirill 23:20, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
My featured article nomination of Confederate government of Kentucky is off to kind of a rough start. One reviewer has suggested that the lead needs to be reworked and that the prose is "unencyclopedic." Having created the article and done much of the editing on it, I think I'm too close to the prose to see the problems. Could interested editors please help me address the issues? Thanks. Acdixon 16:22, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
In looking through the vast listing of red-linked articles that have been requested, I note that few are really worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia compendium such as Wikipedia. Many are rather trivial, or are better covered as subsets of more general topics. Could this list be pared down to the critical few that folks can really work on, rather than this catch-all list? 8th Ohio Volunteers 18:37, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
There's a new peer review request for Hugh Boyle Ewing that may be of interest to you; any input there would be appreciated. Thanks! Kirill 03:45, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
There's a new peer review request for John Watts de Peyster that may be of interest to you; any input there would be appreciated. Thanks! Kirill 03:45, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Greetings from Wikipedia:WikiProject Disambiguation! I just disambiguated [[ partisan]]. I did not find an article on Confederate partisans (I looked) so the Confederate uses are now linked to [[ Partisan (military)]]. That's a generic article, and it's certainly not wrong, but there were so many Confederate references it is clear that "partisan" has a specific meaning in the context of the American Civil War, so there ought to be a specific article. — Randall Bart (talk) 05:46, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
There's a new peer review request for Johnston de Peyster that may be of interest to you; any input there would be appreciated. Thanks! Kirill 01:04, 3 August 2007 (UTC)