Talk:Sixty Years' War

message: Is this the Sixty Years' War or the Sixty Years War?  I'm not sure why "Years'" is possessive. Mingusboodle (talk) 18:47, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's possesive, like Seven Years' War, Nine Years' War, Thirty Years' War, and Hundred Years' War. The apostrophe seems standard, if sometimes optional. —Kevin Myers 21:54, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Name

message: "Great Britain ceded the Old Northwest—the homeland of many of her American Indian allies—to the Americans". Shouldn't it be "to the European Americans" according to the newer liberal agenda? For example, in this major article, there is "fighting European American settlers on the frontier", clearly depicting non-Europeans as Americans.--Adûnâi (talk) 10:13, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed it to read to the young United States instead of to the Americans.  Canute (talk) 13:05, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this an example of the older American supremacism? 

message: This article gives a good, broad overview of the conflicts mentioned, but it stops rather abruptly after the War of 1812.  Should there be a little more follow up about the overall effects, or perhaps how this series of wars influenced and were influenced by other conflicts on the continent?  I also wonder if how it transitions to some of the conflicts that follow, such as the Indian Removals or the Black Hawk War in 1832.  I'm not really sure what to do, I'm just looking for opinions.  There may be some good opportunities to expand this article, if it doesn't go beyond the scope. Canute (talk) 17:20, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: It depends on what historians say. We can't do our own original information on Wikipedia after all. Yourlocallordandsavior (talk) 01:00, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  What follows? 

message: King William's War, Queen Anne's War, and War of Jenkin's Ear? Or add it as a precursor section. Yourlocallordandsavior (talk) 06:12, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, notably the Beaver Wars.  But there was a large gap between those and the beginning of the French and Indian War.  Most war articles would have a section giving the background or context of the conflict, as you suggest.  I'm not sure what to do here, because it's a little different.  Is it better to add a precursor section before diving into the Sixty Years' War, or is this different because the concept of a "Sixty Years' War" is an academic framework created to understand the conquest of the region by European (and the United States) powers? Canute (talk) 13:16, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Surely there must've been wars over the Northwest before 1754? 

message: The references section lists 3 sources that don't seem to be cited in the article: Tanner, Trask, and White.  I've gone through the article history and it seems like they have been there for at least 10 years, but I haven't found a version where they've been cited in the article.  (Trask was referenced in the text at one point, but there was no citation giving a page number.)  Does anyone have these references?  I don't necessarily want to delete them, but if they aren't used in the article, I don't see the point of listing them as references. Canute (talk) 13:14, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources without citations 

message: I see the Spanish have been added, presumably because the Patriot War was concurrent with the War of 1812?
On these grounds, given that the War of 1812 was concurrent with the Napoleonic Wars, the Danish & French should be added, as enemies of the British, and the Russians & Swedish should be added as allies of the British.
I see no source-based evidence that Spanish forces were deployed and directly involved in operations on the Great Lakes in the period 1812 to 1814. Keith H99 (talk) 16:43, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spanish participation