Talk:War of 1812
<templatestyles src="Module:Message box/tmbox.css"/><templatestyles src="Talk header/styles.css" />
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the War of 1812 Template:Pagetype. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Template:Find general sources |
| Archives: Template:Comma separated entries<templatestyles src="Template:Tooltip/styles.css" />Auto-archiving periodScript error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".: Template:Human readable duration File:Information icon4.svg |
Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".Script error: No such module "Check for deprecated parameters".
Script error: No such module "English variant notice". Script error: No such module "Article history".
Script error: No such module "Banner shell". Script error: No such module "Message box". Template:Annual readership Template:Section sizes Script error: No such module "Message box". User:MiszaBot/config User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
Last sentence of the lead
As of right now, it looks like this:
"In early 1815, American troops led by Andrew Jackson repulsed a major British attack on New Orleans, which occurred during the ratification process of the signing of the Treaty of Ghent, which brought an end to the conflict."
As I was reading the article, I personally found this repetition quite unpleasant to voice in my mind. Hence, I removed the second "which" by separating the last clause into an independent sentence. My edit, though, was reverted for "not improving anything". On the one hand, I am quite willing to contest this notion, but either away, I believe the sentence should revised some way. Daminb 18:44, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
- "The Treaty of Ghent was signed in December 1814, though it would be February before word reached the United States and the treaty was fully ratified. In the interim, American troops led by Andrew Jackson repulsed a major British attack on New Orleans."
- Thoughts? There already are a lot of wikilinks but I do think Jackson deserves the one I propose adding.--Noren (talk) 00:11, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for replying, @Noren. I personally like it a lot. Daminb 14:23, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- I agree, this reads better and should replace the current version. Anonymoususer95 (talk) 22:24, 8 February 2025 (UTC) Anonymoususer95 (talk) 22:24, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
George Cockburn's role in the War of 1812?
He was involved in commanding a number of Royal Navy operations and also planned, directed, and participated in the Capture and Burning of Washington. Is it worth considering adding him the belligerent list? 9mm.trilla (talk) 05:41, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
- I'd agree it's worth considering, I'm not arguing against him in particular. The trouble is that the belligerents list tends to grow over time as it tends to be easy to add and more challenging to remove. The template recommends no more than seven persons be mentioned in that field, and the recent practice here has been to conform with that. The infobox is quite long and a summary cannot contain everything. So, if you are given a constraint of seven names, which of the current names do you think should be removed to make room for Cockburn? --Noren (talk) 16:10, 10 May 2025 (UTC)