Talk:Battles of Lexington and Concord

message: In the 3rd Paragraph of the article introduction, it is stated: "The initial mode of the Army's arrival by water was signaled from the Old North Church in Boston to Charleston using lanterns to communicate "one if by land, two if by sea"." This sentence should read: "The initial mode of the Army's arrival by water was signaled from the Old North Church in Boston to Charlestown using lanterns to communicate "one if by land, two if by sea". Charleston is a city in South Carolina, unrelated to Paul Revere's warning. Charlestown is the city in Boston which received Revere's famous message.
(Vengeancelacrosse (talk) 18:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Done DRAGON BOOSTER  ★ 18:50, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Just for information, the major city of South Carolina was called Charles Town or Charlestown until well after the war of independence. Humphrey Tribble (talk) 01:14, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The South Carolina city was originally known as Charles Town, then Charlestown, Charles Ton and finally Charleston. Humphrey Tribble (talk) 03:31, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correction of City name 

message: But it's already there!  Not quite. It could be placed on the same footing as the Battle of Lexington and the Battle of Concord, although for my money none of them warrants being labelled a battle. "Skirmishes on the First Day" is more accurate. 
A stub article Battle of Menotomy exists. However, I think that information and some more should be included with the article about the rest of that day's fighting. See my discussion on the talk page for Battle of Menotomy. Humphrey Tribble (talk) 21:15, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Integration of article Battle of Menotomy with Battles of Lexington and Concord 

message: I have just added a topic with the above title to the article  Battle of Menotomy. It mentions a PBS story which included information I haven’t seen anywhere else. There are no references so that story can’t be treated as reliable. Nevertheless, it may contain some clues which would help track down additional information, if someone is keen to flesh out the Battle of Menotomy. Humphrey Tribble (talk) 14:51, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: Has use of the word occupation been discussed before? I can’t find anything in the archive. I think this comes up in the article about the Boston massacre too.
The link in this article tells me the following:
Military occupation, also known as belligerent occupation or simply occupation, is the effective military control by a ruling power over a territory that is outside of that power's sovereign territory.
: The British don’t seem to have been in control, at least not in the way I think of occupation. Plus the colonies were not outside British sovereign territory.
: I expect the word occupation has become part of the canon of the revolution so it is difficult to change even if there was an alternative. A similar issue of perspective comes up when the word invasion is used with respect to the revolution. it all changes after the treaty of Paris, and it can be argued as changing when independence was declared. 
Can anyone suggest how this question of perspective is handled in other rebellions? An example not involving the British Army would make it clear. (I’m not suggesting such an example should be in the article.) Perhaps colonies elsewhere in the Americas, Africa, or even the Philippines? Humphrey Tribble (talk) 18:40, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Occupation of Boston