Talk:List of battles (alphabetical)

message: I have completed the identification of the battles on this list.  In doing so I've taken the list as it came, without enterring into the subjective exercise of rating the importance of any specific battle.  Many items on the list were obscure and difficult to identify, particularly battles from Chinese history or from other areas that are not a part of the West European/North American tradition.  Some of the names for the wars had to be guessed, or even invented; I simply wanted enough there to enable the next person to take things a little further.  Many, many battles remain to be added to this list, and I hope to be adding some as the spirit moves me.  Meanwhile, I hope that anyone adding to the list will do a little more than putting empty battle names. Eclecticology, Tuesday, July 9, 2002
I partially agree but posters should leave names unaltered which they don't know. Sometimes the original poster wasn't available to thoroughly account for the battles (i.e. as in my case) or they simply didin't have the expertise to do it. It is better to add comments next to the names than inventing something that may never have existed, adding more confusion to the unknown. Ktsquare July 12 2002
I agree.  What I supplied for war names was often little more than saying who the combatants were.  A person knowledgeable enough abaout the historical context of a particular battle should be able to correct that easily.  Eclecticology, Friday, July 12, 2002
----
I removed "Battle of New Orleans (1862)".  The Union took New Orleans without a battle. There was a naval engagement at Fort Jackson near the mouth of the Mississippi earlier, but I have not heard that refered to as a "Battle of New Orleans".  I live in New Orleans, and have only heard that term used in reference to the 1815 battle.  -- Infrogmation 05:26 Nov 15, 2002 (UTC)
:My source does include the Fort Jackson incident in what it calls the "Battle of New Orleans". I agree that the city itself was taken without a battle, but sometimes we do need some way to refer to these incidents.  "Battle" is often a convenient generic term for those of us who may not be as familiar with the particular circumstances of an incident as you are in this case.  Indeed, I'm sure that it's not the only incident where a victory was won without a shot.  Whatever the local usage the term is used by some others, notably at http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/stream/faq45-10.htm  At the risk of seeming obtuse, I believe that the name shoul;d go back in. Eclecticology 08:17 Nov 15, 2002 (UTC)
List of Polish battles (alphabetical)
----
Since this article is introduced as a list of historical battles, I have removed the Battle of Yavin.  There have been innumerable wars and conflicts in fiction - if we were to list all the major engagements from these stories as well we would flood out the real with the fictitious and remove the historical value of this list.  And why should Yavin be worth a mention if Wolf 359 is not?  - Adaru 22:34, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: There are several problems with this list:
1) It will be very difficult to complete.
2) Some battles are not listed by their most commonly known name. (and they should be)
3) Some battles are 'red' but articles for them exist only by different names.
4) Some of the 'battles' on the list are sieges, not battles. There exists a separate List of sieges. 
5) There is no standard procedure of adding battles to the list.
I recommend careful one-by-one examination of the list by a crew. --Ineffable3000 06:43, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problems 

message: This article had no consensus to delete in AfD, the discussion can be found here. Yanksox 20:00, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  AfD