This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Tirronan (talk | contribs) at 18:31, 24 January 2023 (→Not A Neutral Article). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 18:31, 24 January 2023 by Tirronan (talk | contribs) (→Not A Neutral Article)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the War of 1812 article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29Auto-archiving period: 15 days |
This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
War of 1812 is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive. | ||||||||||
|
A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on June 18, 2004, June 18, 2005, June 18, 2006, June 18, 2007, December 24, 2010, and June 18, 2018. |
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
|
This page is for discussions about changes to the article. There has been considerable debate over "who won the war" (please refer to Archives 8 and 9 for the most recent discussions). Historians and the editors have various viewpoints on which side won, or if there was a stalemate. For more information, see the section *Memory and historiography, Historian's views*. However, the consensus, based on historical documentation, is that the result of the war was per the Treaty of Ghent, i.e., status quo ante bellum, which, in plain English means "as things were before the war." Please do not use this page to continue the argument that one or the other side "won" unless you are able to present citations from reliable and verifiable sources to support your claims. Per the principle of neutral point of view and due and undue weight, the article can only claim a side's victory if there is a verifiable general agreement. |
Archive index |
Index |
This page has archives. Sections older than 15 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 2 sections are present. |
The American killed in action
the American gave head in action is listed at 2,200 which is completely false. The source is Warfare and Armed Conflicts: A Statistical Encyclopedia of Casualty and Other Figures which is known to be a terrible book filled with inaccuracies. If you tally American killed on all the pages on Misplaced Pages as well as other engagements not on Misplaced Pages the number comes to around 3,300. Bernner (talk) 18:37, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
- Firstly, if you are going to make a change on the page, be sure to actually update/remove the prior source you are replacing, because your prior edit changed the content without changing the citation (which would lead to confusion for the reader if they needed to track down the figures).
- In saying that, if you have a contention with the cited content, please provide an actual reliable source for said figures (keep in mind, Misplaced Pages is a reflection of what is published on reliable sources). We do not use other Misplaced Pages articles as a source/citation, as that would be inappropriate self-referencing (per WP:CIRCULAR). Additionally, we do not surmise our own conclusions by combining figures from multiple soures as that would be considered original research and something not verified by secondary sources (see WP:OR and WP:SYNTH for details on that). Generally speaking (not just for this article) you should not be combining/synthesizing the figures from different sources (given how there differing standards of what is counted, etc.), let alone from Misplaced Pages (as that's self-referential). Leventio (talk) 19:50, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
Not A Neutral Article
This article states more often than not that the cause of the war was British actions. The historians quoted supporting this view, however, are all American and their objectivity is obviously questionable.
Needs a discussion as to whether this is an American-centric article and should be more neutral as per Misplaced Pages guidelines. Sheppey Red (talk) 18:43, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
- Provide examples, because I don't see a real problem.
- There is a wide variety of opinions in the United States on the War of 1812. U.S. historians Ronald Drez and Troy Bickham clearly don't share the same opinion of this war. Same with U.S. historians Donald Hickey and George Daughan.
- I would like to know why Benn and Lambert are still quoted on the main article. Lambert is just a Royal Naval enthusiast with very heavy anti-American rhetoric who failed to research the land campaign. Benn's information is better but very outdated; the book is not nearly as informative as Taylor or Toll.
- American-centric would be that the United States won. The main article is far from that perspective. I would argue that the article gives too much emphasis to the Canadas based on modern popular perception. Ironic Luck (talk) 00:44, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
- It is often screamed that this article is tilted. One gentleman took it as a personal crusade to have the article state that the British won for 13 years. Throughout the report, we took pains to present the facts and only the facts without commentary of any sort. While a small war, it is a complex one. Some Canadians would swear on a stack of bibles that American greed was the only reason the war started. Some Americans insist that since we kept the country whole, we won. However, there is ample documentation on both the American Government of the time and the British that maritime trade was the issue.
- The object of contention over the last 15 years that I have been involved as an editor on this article has been the outcome section. There are and remain wars that do not lend themselves as a won/lost outcome. This war was one of them. Having read through the letters and memorandum of both governments, it becomes apparent that both sides wanted out of a war that had no chance of ever ending outside of a settlement.
- As with the American Revolutionary War, trying to supply and equip an army for continuous operations from across the Atlantic Ocean was all but impossible in the age of sail. Moreover, the lack of a good transportation network crippled any offensive operation from either side of the US/Canadian border. Further, the one edge the British enjoyed in land operations, a professional military, had disappeared when American professional military formations began appearing.
- British proponents will point with pride the accomplishments of the Royal Navy. Rightly so. But, Americathann didn't need trade as anything but a profit center. As I have repeatedly stated, neither side ever concluded a successful offensive campainn.
- From the long view, the America of 1812 was unwilling to change society to field a large professional army and build a road network to enable a successful Canadian campaign. That same lack kept the British from accomplishing attempts to move forward with such ended in disasters. The two sides were like drunken boxers able to hurt one another but never force a conclusion.Tirronan (talk) 18:24, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages articles that use Canadian English
- Selected anniversaries (June 2004)
- Selected anniversaries (June 2005)
- Selected anniversaries (June 2006)
- Selected anniversaries (June 2007)
- Selected anniversaries (December 2010)
- Selected anniversaries (June 2018)
- All unassessed articles
- C-Class military history articles
- C-Class British military history articles
- British military history task force articles
- C-Class Canadian military history articles
- Canadian military history task force articles
- C-Class European military history articles
- European military history task force articles
- C-Class North American military history articles
- North American military history task force articles
- C-Class United States military history articles
- United States military history task force articles
- C-Class Napoleonic era articles
- Napoleonic era task force articles
- B-Class United States articles
- High-importance United States articles
- B-Class United States articles of High-importance
- B-Class United States military history articles
- B-Class United States History articles
- High-importance United States History articles
- WikiProject United States History articles
- WikiProject United States articles
- B-Class Canada-related articles
- High-importance Canada-related articles
- B-Class Ontario articles
- High-importance Ontario articles
- B-Class Quebec articles
- High-importance Quebec articles
- B-Class History of Canada articles
- High-importance History of Canada articles
- All WikiProject Canada pages
- B-Class United Kingdom articles
- Mid-importance United Kingdom articles
- WikiProject United Kingdom articles
- B-Class Indigenous peoples of North America articles
- Low-importance Indigenous peoples of North America articles
- WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America articles
- Misplaced Pages pages referenced by the press