Talk:Raid on the Medway

message: In the text on Terschelling it says that the Raid on the Medway was a retaliatory expedition after "Sir" Robert Holmes had gone a bit overboard and burned 150 merchant ships as well as the town of West-Terschelling to the ground in Holmes's Bonfire. There is no mention of this in this article. Could anyone check if this is true (and then add it). Afasmit 01:57, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Checked.  P5 ref name="Pepys" /The Dutch Raid on the Medway, Samuel Pepys, 1667 /ref  added as link to prevent duplication.ClemRutter 09:00, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Retaliation?

message: There are lots of references to "the chain", but at no point is it introduced. From what I gather it was literally a metal chain, rather than a chain of things, but beyond that I can tell nothing. Is having chains across rivers a frequent maritime occurrence? How big was the chain? How long had it been there? danno 19:56, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed it was in the age of sail common to protect harbours by booms or chains. Of course the phenomenon can't be fully treated within the context of this article, but I'll try to add some detail in the text.--MWAK (talk) 20:33, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: The chain

message: The rear board (stern) of one of the two ships, The HMS Royal Charles, is still on display in the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam as a war trophy. I renember looking at it when, as a boy, I visited the museum. Peter Horn User talk 16:09, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: And so it is. Peter Horn User talk 21:41, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  The two captured ships 

message: The battle was between 19 and 24 June, not between 9 and 14 June!! Targaryenspeak or forever remain  silent 21:37, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It;s a mess all the dates should be checked and converted to the current date system.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.169.103.207 (talk) 23:23, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, there is no such thing as an absolute date; this is a matter of convention. In general it is best — at least for the day of the month — to apply the date system in use at a certain time and place. Otherwise we would have to indicate that Julius Ceasar was murdered at 25 March, which would be a bit awkward to say the least. Also this makes a reference to contemporary literature a lot easier: e.g. we are citing Pepys' diary which naturally conforms to indicating Julian dates but would have to be separately explained when using Gregorian dates. Of course the Dutch in 1667 officially used Gregorian dates and this has to be made clear.--MWAK (talk) 06:55, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Dates

message: The piece from Military Affairs titled "The Dutch invasion of England: 1667" is in the public domain. It can be accessed here. So if anyone wants to incorporate text from it, it's allowed per WP:PD (with care). Bataaf van Oranje (Prinsgezinde) (talk) 18:21, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Another reference, from BBC: Battle of Medway: The English defeat that's largely forgotten. Onanoff (talk) 21:32, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Just a quick note

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Raid on the Medway. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070517100655/http://www.deruyter.org/CHATHAM_Dutch_in_the_Medway.html to http://www.deruyter.org/CHATHAM_Dutch_in_the_Medway.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:25, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified