Talk:Battle of Ash Hollow

message: This article was formerly part of the Grattan Massacre article.  I moved the section here to make a separate article because the two events under the same article was a little confusing.
:These articles really were more valuable as a single article providing context and a single narrative. Chopping it up removes the implied context that these events were really part of the same sequence of events. --Stbalbach 15:08, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

message: This and the 'Battle of Blue Water' article describe the same event and need to be merged somehow.   Thanks Hmains 01:21, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. They were one article originally (I created it) but someone split them apart without any discussion or consensus. I think it should jut be restored - it's confusing to have these events split apart. -- Stbalbach 01:29, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  merge 

message: This article contradicts the related one on the Grattan Massacre - it alleges that "artillery" was taken along by Ltn. Grattan, and used to kill Chief Conquering Bear. There is no mention of this in the article on the subject, only of infantry. Neither does it make sense from a military point of view: Grattan was a very junior officer, leading a detachment of less than platoon size, on a mission that had more to do with law enforcement than warfare. His rank and position made it unlikely that he himself had the authority to attach artillery to his command. His orders were obviously to bring in an Indian suspected of stock theft, not to engage in major combat. 
I have therefore removed these rather incongruous references to "artillery".  Textor (talk) 10:20, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You are mistaken.  The artillery Grattan took along is mentioned in every substantial account of the battle, and it was never suggested that he attached it on his own authority.  I restored the mention of artillery, but left out the part about the artillery killing Conquering Bear, since the best evidence suggests the artillery inflicted no damage except to tepee-tops. 71.136.180.190 (talk) 20:17, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Then cite the source(s) that say artillery was taken. Neither this nor the Grattan Massacre article are well-cited.Parkwells (talk) 21:58, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Like most other articles about the Indian Wars, they are an embarrassment to wikipedia--POV, unsourced, comic book prose, hodgepodges of irrelevant trivia, PC-driven, Avatars of history articles. One tries to rewrite--and is soon overwhelmed with the futility.  It's a full-time job, and if I ever retire, I'll tackle it.--Reedmalloy (talk) 15:14, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Unsupported Claim concerning "Artillery"

message: This and the Grattan Massacre article seem to have conflicting details about how High Forehead got the cow, and the specific events related to Conquering Bear's death.  The other article says he was shot in the back.  Both accounts should be the same, or the varying sources should be cited. Both accounts need to have more citations from sources supporting the statements in the articles.Parkwells (talk) 21:58, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Conflicting/incomplete accounts about cow and death of Conquering Bear

message: In article is: "Following this battle, there were about ten years of peace between the United States and the Sioux, who tried to ignore the many emigrants on the Oregon Trail."
Definitely there was no peace for ten years.
Already in September 1856 the Lakota warriors attacked a wagon train and killed four people.
And in the same year the Lakotas and Cheyennes attacked on the Little Blue River. For more battles and skirmishers see Gregory Michno's excellent book "Encyclopedia of Indian Wars".  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goonero (talk • contribs) 22:59, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsubstantiated Claim