Talk:Battle of Rorke's Drift

message: Quote:  Later that evening a portion of the No. 2 Column under Brevet Colonel Anthony Durnford, late of the Royal Engineers
I don't get the meaning of "late of" in this context.  Thanks.  Maikel (talk) 13:26, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Late of? 

message: Is it correct to describe the encounter in this way? Roger 8 Roger (talk) 23:14, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes -----Snowded TALK 09:02, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps you're unfamiliar with the Manual of Style? There are two options: "X Victory" or "See aftermath" (e.g. for status quo ante bellum). Not all articles have caught up with the convention, but this one is correct. Wiki-Ed (talk) 15:29, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

text: No, that's a template. The MOS itself has different guidance, although I see that there inconsistencies in terms of exact wording while changes work through. But the point remains that we don't include qualifiers. Wiki-Ed (talk) 09:55, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

text: It may not be a hugely helpful comparison, so apologies for that, but I cannot help thinking of the Battle of Britain, where the attackers also withdrew in good order and gave up the attack of their own volition, the defenders were, at the moment of victory, facing exhaustion and being imminently overwhelmed, the attackers suffered barely higher casualties (in aircraft) than the defenders, and the point of contention on Wikipedia is whether to describe it as a "victory" or "decisive victory" in the infobox. MPS1992 (talk) 20:33, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

text: The statement of victory in the context of a battle, not the total war.   The Zulu sought to take it and failed and/or choose to fail (depending on how you read history and the myths around the film).  As such, per Wiki-Ed the use is correct, or my much simpler yes.   -----Snowded TALK 06:58, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: We don't assess proportionality here - in the context of the Zulu wars it was a victory and coming after the previous massive defeat was more significant.   -----Snowded TALK 09:48, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: In any case Wikipedia is not a place for reinterpreting sources. If the consensus view in RS is that this was a stalemate then we can change it. I am guessing, but I think you'll struggle to find a single source for that. Wiki-Ed (talk) 09:55, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Victory?

message: In Defence Of The Hospital, para 5 "After fifty minutes" is quoted. Would it take so long? Why? What was the wall made from? SkyBod (talk) 18:54, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Duration query 

message: This may have come up before, but is it accurate to describe the result this way? Wouldn't it be better to leave out the section named result, as happens in other engagements where a clear result cannot be succinctly described. The encounter was not really even a stalemate, making that label inaccurate as well. We should remember the purpose of this result label - keep it short and sweet without any opinion adjectives. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 03:52, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think much has changed in the two years and ten months since you last asked this question: the Zulus attempted to take the ground, and the British were still in possession of the field when the Zulus withdrew. it may have been just minutes away from a Zulu victory, but the Zulu attack failed. IdreamofJeanie (talk) 05:34, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I did check back through the archives because I did think I had raised it before, but found nothing. I should have checked on the current talk page though, so my apologies for unintended repetion. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 06:46, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: British victory - really?

message: What if british got new reinforcesmet then? 58.11.27.101 (talk) 18:50, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  If british