Talk:List of American Civil War battles

message: Battle of Decatur has been completed. Will add a map later today. 578 18:24, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Battle Pages 

message: These campaigns have been completed using public domain text copied from the CWSAC website. The text still needs to be wikified. --brian0918™ 03:23, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The historian that is the National Park Service.  Even this list isn't complete, there were sub-battles within battles, and some battles were missed.  -- BRIAN0918  05:06, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

text: Ask the National Park Service. --brian0918™ 21:51, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Campaigns completed

message: The article Troop engagements of the American Civil War, divided into by-year articles, is substantially overlapping with this article. I can see it having a slightly different purpose (chronological vs. geographical, detailed listing of even minor skirmishes, etc.) but among other faults, that listing is incomplete -- only 1861, 62, and 63 were ever entered. Either that article should be beefed up and made useful in its own right, or the information should be merged here or into a supporting article from the Category. --Dhartung | Talk 18:49, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: This picture of the US is really awesome, it almost knocked me over. Who made it?
Flameviper12 15:05, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Whoa 

message: I have followed a suggestion by BusterD to merge in the date-sorted list from his former List of battles of the American Civil War article. I recommend that battle-article authors check this list because it misses some recently written articles. (If someone who likes to tinker wants to get involved, this portion would look pretty cool as a table with columns Battle, Dates, Description, Outcome.) Hal Jespersen 16:34, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merged 

message: Battle of Philippi Races June 3 - Union of gay rebels  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.234.4.10 (talk) 15:13, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism- what should it be replaced with? 

message: In an effort to Be Bold, I've changed the heading for Idaho to Washington Territory.  Idaho didn't even exist in the early part of 1863 when the Bear River Massacre took place, although it should be noted that this region of the western USA was in tremendous political flux in terms of how it was administered throughout the whole period of the U.S. Civil War, having been previously a part of Oregon and then later move to the newly formed Idaho Territory later on in 1863.  By the end of the Civil War, several states were created in this region, and territorial boundaries were established that are more or less what the current state boundaries are for the western USA.
In writing the heading, I followed the pattern used for the Indian Territory.  If there is any objection/concern about what I did here, I hope this can be a place to discuss this change.  --Robert Horning (talk) 15:41, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changing Idaho to Washington Territory 

message: I'd like to add raids listed in the book by Colonel Robert W. Black because there is no list of raids for American Civil War if that's ok.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 09:10, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  raids 

message: General Longstreet had 500,000 men and they were all slautered in 12 minutes by 10 Union soldiers and then America won the civil war.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.141.2.51 (talk) 00:22, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Battle of Greencastle 

message: There is currently an ArbCom injunction against mass date delinking by single editors while this case is being heard. That said, I'm requesting consensus from other editors to allow me to delink the dates and possibly other script-assisted cleanup edits on this specific article.
*Support.⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 19:56, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request consensus for delinking dates on this article 

message: According to the map, there were battles fought in two counties in Minnesota, but no battles in Minnesota appear on the list of battles by state. 76.197.234.170 (talk) 00:18, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I added battles from the Dakota War of 1862, which are included in the Official Records of the American Civil War. Mojoworker (talk) 08:10, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minnesota 

message: This is obviously fake. "Gen. Claypool" doesn't exist, and McClellan was on the Peninsula on June 6th, 1862, just having fought Fair Oaks/Seven Pines five days earlier.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.74.171.15 (talk) 17:37, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Battle of Kentuck? 

message: Using the same rationale as the previous change of Idaho to Washington Territory to be consistent with Indian Territory and New Mexico Territory. Mojoworker (talk) 08:41, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changing North Dakota to Dakota Territory 

message: * I noticed many redundant entires between the "by date" and "by state" sections, so I consolidated them: combined five tables, added and populated a "state" field, and removed all redundant entries in the "states" list. The combined table is now sortable on all fields except Outcome. Currently, sorting by Outcome would be meaningless, because the data isn't systematically formatted. If anyone wants to prepend (by hand!) "Union victory, Confederate victory, inconclusive" to every single one of those entries, then making that field sortable would make sense... I don't know if it's worth the trouble... The "by States" list now should contain only entries that are not in the table above, but I would bet a dollar that there are a few dupes to to redirects.. such as "Foo Battle I" as opposed to "First Battle of Foo"... • Ling.Nut (talk) 07:51, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There's room for some confusion since Arizona Territory (USA) was split from New Mexico Territory on February 24, 1863 along with the existence of the geographically different Arizona Territory (CSA), known as Confederate Arizona, which was officially declared on August 1, 1861.  Going with the existing classification scheme of listing based on the situation at the time of the occurance, I think they're OK now. And thanks for creating the sortable table -- it's is a nice improvement. Mojoworker (talk) 15:32, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  major changes to page 

message: * I'm working on bringing the main table into conformance with the list of battles ranked by CWSAC. When that's done, I'd like to move all battles not ranked by CWSAC into one of two new tables: one for Indian wars, and one for minor battles/skirmishes.
* I know there are multiple Indian wars during this time period, and i believe that some of them are technically considered to be part of the US Civil war, but making a separate table for them would put them in a place where someone who knows more about that particular field can find them easily... it also would make the first table a pure CWSAC table.
* Is this OK? Your input solicited. • Ling.Nut (talk) 05:13, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Make three tables:  CWSAC, Minor/Skirmish, Indian wars 

message: I've been spending some time editing the list since the very nice major rework by Ling.Nut.  I've come to the conclusion that because of the idiosyncrasies with things like Arizona/New Mexico and Virginia/West Virginia having status that changed during the war, we should be using the present-day states for locations of the battles -- which is probably what most people are interested in anyway. So, where it currently has "Washington Territory (present-day Idaho)", it would become "Idaho (then Washington Territory)" or "Idaho (Washington Territory at the time)". I already discussed it a bit with Ling.Nut, so I am planning to be bold and do it. Mojoworker (talk) 21:55, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Present-day States 

message: Needs more citations, a lot more. I need citations for the theaters, what made you guys come up with them and why those definitions, along with citations from where all the battles to know that they were not all made up. Although unlikely, its still required.
ThisguyYEAH (talk) 00:44, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I would not go overboard on citations for an article that is mostly lists and summaries of Wikipedia articles. However, the theater and campaign definitions are based on the NPS CWSAC report. Hal Jespersen (talk) 18:05, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: There were 4 criteria classes: A, B, C, D. After each battle, the author should explain why the class selection was selected. In most cases, this was not done.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.150.121.84 (talk) 08:41, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Those are not our criteria. The classes were defined in the referenced report from the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission. I don't believe they've given detail as to why each site was classified as it is. Anything we add would be prohibited from inclusion as original research. Mojoworker (talk) 22:26, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Battles "aftermath" do not answer the criteria 

message: This article is missing the Battle of Lookout Mountain. Please add it. It occurred in November of 1863. Jgwilliams873 (talk) 17:56, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The listed article Chattanooga Campaign includes the battles of Brown's Ferry, Wauhatchie, Missionary Ridge and Lookout Mountain. I'll confess that the entry of this campaign is unique on this list (in place of the battles of the campaign I mean). To give examples, on this list, the Chattanooga campaign is treated quite a bit differently from the Vicksburg campaign and the Atlanta campaign, both of which do list their major battles here. Perhaps the four Chattanooga battles should be applied to the list for consistency. Is there any input from page watchers? BusterD (talk) 01:59, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it's a little complicated. The Wikipedia Civil War articles were generally created roughly following from the US National Park Service Civil War Battle Summaries. There, the Battle of Lookout Mountain and the Battle of Missionary Ridge are combined as Chattanooga (sometimes referred as the third battle of Chattanooga or Chattanooga III as at the NPS Search For Battles page). I suppose we could/should combine the two articles to follow suit, but for now and for the sake of expediency, I added both battles to the list in place of the current campaign. Mojoworker (talk) 10:26, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Glad to see your datestamp here. I was looking at this a bit more deeply, and am starting to think we have a slightly larger problem. We seem to missing an article on Third Battle of Chattanooga (TN024). Look at the disambiguation page for Battle of Chattanooga. The battles for Chattanooga occurring November 23-25 1863 should include the advances on Tunnel Hill and Orchard Knob, then the battles of Lookout Mountain and Missionary Ridge. The campaign should start at Brown's Ferry (no CWSAC number), Wauhatchie (TN021), then III Chattanooga (TN024), Lookout Mountain (no number), Missionary Ridge (no number) and conclude at Ringgold Gap (GA005). I'm looking at page histories. I see User:Hlj was trying to cut this Gordian knot in January 2009. Here's the version of Third Battle of Chattanooga Hal redirected when he completed his reorganization. Here are his articles on Battle of Missionary Ridge and Battle of Lookout Mountain. Back in the day, Hal created almost all the maps we use on ACW articles. This work likely informed his choices here. BusterD (talk) 00:03, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, it gets confusing.  lists Battle of Lookout Mountain, Battle of Missionary Ridge, and Ringgold Gap.  has Brown's Ferry and Wauhatchie. I think those are still the same as the campaigns defined by the National Park Service. I know Hal retired from Wikipedia, but I believe he said he would be available to answer questions – it would be interesting to know why he changed things up from Third Battle of Chattanooga. This resource could also be relevant: Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields, State of Tennessee. Things have deviated from the NPS/ABPP/CWSAC categorization, but maybe it's not too far off. For this List article, we could maybe revert Lookout Mountain and Missionary Ridge back out and add Third Battle of Chattanooga linking to the existing campaign article. Thoughts? Mojoworker (talk) 07:22, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: It's clear that for parallel structure we should have articles on each of the battles to which CWSAC assigned numbers. There are several actions or sub-actions which have no numbers but should still get articles. So I agree we should think about "recreating" the third battle article (using the redirect will keep full attribution) and focusing the campaign article to better summarize the entire two month process. There's no rush here, but it's a somewhat startling discovery. I'm sure Hal would be happy to weigh in. When a new editor had an issue with a map Hal had created long ago he was willing to perform small changes to improve it. BusterD (talk) 11:40, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Battle of Lookout Mountain 

message: The Battle of Lewisburg (May 23, 1862, 300+ casualties) and the Battle of Charleston (September 13, 1862, 600+ casualties) are not in the list and don't get much recognition from the National Park Service. Perhaps they got lost in the Virginia to West Virginia transition. I think they should be added. They had some "big name" players: George Crook, Henry Heth, William Wing Loring, Albert G. Jenkins, Joseph Andrew Jackson Lightburn, Gabriel C. Wharton, and the less famous William H. Powell. The Battle of Charleston (1862) will be upgraded by the end of the summer 2022. TwoScars (talk) 16:39, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say add them to the non CWSAC. There's probably some reason why the Park Service didn't add them in the first place but with 300+ causalities for both, I can't say why. A lot of fights west of the Mississippi were really minor but were included on the non CWSAC list.  Just my two cents... Qstor2 (talk) 16:22, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Missing West Virginia Battles

message: I was thinking of adding this to the USA/CSA Battles not rated by CWSAC list? There's already a Wiki article:
Fight at Monterey Pass
Thoughts?
Thanks 
Qstor2 (talk) 16:12, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Battle of Monterey Pass