Talk:Battle of Chapultepec

message: I read this same article  a couple a months ago, and now I see with changes that contradict themselves. In the box on the right says that they were 800 mexican cadets (a number impossible at the time), but then in the article it states that they were 200 and the 100.
the it says that several mexican cadets wrapped themselves with mexican flags and then jumped to the cliff capture of the flag. I have never know of anyone else than Juan Escutia and even  this case sometimes subjet debate.
The phrase that Santa Ana's aide says about the flag, I have never heard such a thing. There are a lot of rumors like that from boths sides, all of them more folkloric than accurate, I do not think that cooment like that, without any form of support should be written in wikipedia.
Also, the description of the battle does not have any references, which, I think, questions its credibility.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.124.50.122 (talk) 19:31, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: neither all the stories back then from the United States. The entire war was clearly an expancionist excuse for the United States to gain more land by buying or by force.--187.146.199.197 (talk) 19:27, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not a clear article 

message: Isn't strange the article cite 2,623 mexican casualties in a 400 men battle? -Ilhador- (talk) 00:06, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Casualties

message: The page for Battle of Mexico City lists 1651 American casualties for several battles in Mexico City, including Chapultepec but the page for the Battle of Chapultepec lists 1933 American Casualties. Something does not add up.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.187.160.203 (talk) 23:21, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Casualties do not add up 

message: The page for Battle of Mexico City lists 1651 American casualties for several battles in Mexico City, including Chapultepec but the page for the Battle of Chapultepec lists 1933 American Casualties. Something does not add up.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.187.160.203 (talk) 23:22, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Casualties do not add up 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Battle of Chapultepec. 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/20091105190956/http://www.usmcmuseum.org/Museum_LoreCorps.asp to http://www.usmcmuseum.org/Museum_LoreCorps.asp
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) 01:04, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: According to the study by the USMC "MARINES IN THE MEXICAN WAR 1991" the only Marines in Scott's Army in the Mexico City campaign was Watson's Marine Battalion. It's strength upon landing at Vera Cruz in Jun 1847 was 314 men. The battalion was reinforced by marines from the Navy Gulf Squadron which had a strength of 315 men in Jun 1847. It is likely that up to 100 gulf sqd marines were added to the battalion, bringing it's strength up to around 400 men. In the Battle of Chapultepec, the bulk of the Marine battalion did not see action as after an initial advance, the Gen Quitman ordered the Marines to halt. Watson was determined to wait there until receiving further orders. Only 7 marines were killed and 5 of them were Privates, so there is no way that 780 Marines were killed.
Additionally the USMC says that the blood stripe story from the Mexican war is a Myth. http://www.quanticosentryonline.com/news/article_c29f9c87-1b4a-52ee-8ccc-abc2d6e63b6d.html
Separately the Mexican army did not have trained snipers. They were using surplus British muskets (e.g. Brown Bess) from the Napoleonic Wars period and possibly had some Baker Rifles from the Napoleonic era as well. This is documented in the Wikipedia article on the Mexican-American War and other sources. As a result it is unlikely they were able to target officers and NCO's.
Marine for Truth  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.220.157.243 (talk) 08:41, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ben and the article are wrong 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Battle of Chapultepec. 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/20050307101405/http://www.dmwv.org/mexwar/documents/mexcity.htm to http://www.dmwv.org/mexwar/documents/mexcity.htm
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) 13:00, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Gen Truman bishop Ransom and his charge forms the legend for Norwich University’s motto “Essayons”.  This article is also an absolute disaster and needs to be heavily edited and re-written.  In at least two parts of the article the times of keys events conflict. 24.151.77.188 (talk) 14:10, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  No mention of Gen. Truman Bishop Ransom: article is a hot mess