Talk:Battle of Corydon

message: According to this site , the battle of Corydon is one of only two battles fought on northern soil (the other being Gettysburg). If that is accurate it would be worth mentioning in the article. However, is it accurate? And if so by what definition?
Off the top of my head I can't think of any other "battles", but wouldnt Battle of Buffington Island and the Battle of Salineville be northern, or do these not qualify as a battle as?  Charles Edward 18:47, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question 

message: I have made this map. Any suggestions for improvements? Charles Edward (Talk) 15:28, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks pretty good.--King Bedford I Seek his grace 15:36, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I second that.  Unit labels:  Defender is the Sixth Indian Legion under Colonel Lewis Jordan.  The attacking brigade was under Stovepipe Johnson according to Matthews.  The rebs first attacked the Indiana left, and were repelled by the "Spencer Guards" under Captain George Lahue (according to Terrell).  The rebs then flank both sides.  The right is defended by Major McGrain, and is armed with 16 Henry rifles (according to Wolfe).  Senour called it the "Henry Rifle Company".  Citizens and other companies in the center, with a ravine out front of them to halt any direct cavalry charge.  Really, not much of a contest.  Green farmers against seasoned cavalry with artillery support.  The cavalry flank them, the artillery fires, and the line breaks.  Senour quotes Wolfe "This shelling operation, together with the fact that our line was about to be flanked on both wings at the same time made it necessary, for the safety of our men, that they should fall back.  This they did, not with the best order, it is true, but with excellent speed".  It was over in 25 minutes, and the confederates had left Cordon after only five hours.  Hot knife through butter. -J JMesserly (talk) 00:44, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Two more personal accounts of the battle here.  -J JMesserly (talk) 17:36, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  battle map 

message: * Reference check by me. 
* NPOV. 
* Check image licenses. 
* Stable. Checked.
* OK, just kill that pending point of texts mentioned in footnotes to be shifted to references so that I can wrap up the assessment.  Additional images may be added later. GA is only a step forward to FA so please keep up the good work.
AshLin (talk) 13:53, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Still more

message: Congrats, please bring it up to A class soon! AshLin (talk) 17:33, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Its a GA!

message: The battle reenactment will be held twice July 11 and 12, 2009 if anyone is interested in attending. I will be there, and hopefully will get some good photos for the article. —Charles Edward (Talk | Contribs) 18:58, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, I might get to go.  Who knows, we may even meet?--King Bedford I Seek his grace 21:08, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

text: That would be exciting! I expect it to be a couple hours long. I am going, probably even if it rains. —Charles Edward (Talk | Contribs) 15:02, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reenactment 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Battle of Corydon. 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/20070927082219/http://www.bryansbush.com/hub.php?page=articles&layer=a0707extra to http://www.bryansbush.com/hub.php?page=articles&layer=a0707extra
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) 02:20, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: - Do you know which edition of Horwitz and Conway you were using for this?  I was trying to trace  back to my paper copy of Horwitz to look for any further details.  It's cited to Horwitz p. 57 but p. 57 in my copy of Horwitz isn't about Corydon at all (it's about a skirmish at Pekin, Indiana and Eli Lilly. Page 67 of Horwitz details individual plunder items from Corydon, but those figures only add up to a little less than $13,000.  After that, I thought I'd look at some more things:
* " As the county commissioner exited the courthouse carrying a rifle he was shot dead, becoming the final casualty of the day" - cited on Conway p. 83.  Can't find this in Conway. Horwitz p. 66 states that the county commissioner was mortally wounded (not shot dead), but doesn't mention that he was the last casualty or that he was carrying a rifle
* "Morgan ate lunch at the Kintner House Inn where he read a newspaper and learned of the Confederate defeat at Gettysburg and the fall of Vicksburg. The news caused him to realize his army was in serious danger; his hosts later said that upon his reading the paper he was "noticeably crestfallen."" - cited to Horwitz p. 59, is Horwitz p. 67 in my edition.  As an aside, the quote looks like it should be "visibly crestfallen" instead of "noticeably crestfallen"
* "At 11:30 a.m. on July 9, the 3rd Regiment Kentucky Cavalry, the advance element of the Confederate forces under the command of Col. Adam R. Johnson, was sighted moving north along the Mauckport Road towards Corydon" - cited to p. 65 of Conway.  Conway mentions the Confederates meeting the Union forces, but neither Johnson nor the 3rd Kentucky are mentioned on that page or the several before or after. FWIW, the only 3rd Kentucky Cavalry in Horwitz's index is a Union unit.
For comparison, I'm using a paperback copy of Conway dated 1991, with the isbn listed as 0-925165-03-4.  My copy of Horwitz is hardcover and dated 2001, with a listed isbn of 0-9670267-2-5. Hog Farm  Talk 00:41, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello! I have to be honest, I am not sure its been so long ago. I do recall it was a paper copy I had at the time of Conway. I had a copy from local library in Corydon, where I also took the pictures. But if I recall, Conway is probably the most important source I used for this article. I still have the copy of Horwitz and Funk I used, I can check those later and will let you know. Important note: I recall that reviewers at the Tippecanoe FAR found an issue with Funk, and this article is also using Funk as a source - the same book. I am not sure I agree, but the reviewers believed Funk was significantly inaccurate about the battle of Tippecanoe. I will try to take a look at those sources a little later and let you know what I find. I should probably also note, that although I wrote most of this article, I did not write it all. So I would have to dig through edits to figure out what was preexisting, etc. Most of the FA's I wrote were collaborative with other editors in WikiProject Indiana back then. —Charles Edward (Talk | Contribs) 20:38, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

text: I'm willing to try to help get the citations hammered out down the road.  I've done a number of FAs on the Civil War recently so I have a fairly good grasp of the sourcing expectations - I've been looking at the older Civil War FAs because I had to recently completely overhaul Thomas C. Hindman because it contained errors and significant omissions as a FA.  It does look like Funk published a piece in the Indiana Magazine of History back in the 50s, which might help Funk's case.  I just won't be able to do much until after Thanksgiving at the earliest due to work and real life commitments. Hog Farm  Talk 22:59, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  have your concerns about the article been resolved? I see that there are a lot of sources listed in Further reading, possibly indicating that this article is not comprehensive. Is work still happening on this article? If not, should this article go to WP:FAR? Z1720 (talk) 03:01, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  All of the further reading except Mingus and Mowery are tangential or primary sources, so that's not a huge concern. I don't know if Mingus would meet the FA sourcing standard from first glance. Mowery is focused on a larger campaign, so I don't know that it would have too much specifically for Corydon. Hog Farm  Talk 03:19, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Horwitz & Conway