Talk:Battle of Oltenița: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Latest revision as of 10:11, 1 December 2024

Military history: Ottoman / Russian & Soviet

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Ottoman military history task force
	Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force

Former countries: Ottoman Empire

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Ottoman Empire (assessed as Mid-importance).

Romania Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Romania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Romania-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RomaniaWikipedia:WikiProject RomaniaTemplate:WikiProject RomaniaRomania articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests :
- Help Romania reach at least GA-status
- Help History of Romania get WP:GOOD
- Request an article or create a missing one
Assess :
- Assess all articles tagged for this project that have not been assessed for quality
Cleanup :
- Review the Romania-related cleanup listing
- Normalize the use of "Northern Bukovina" (capitalized) and "Northern Bessarabia" (Bessarabian part of Chernivtsi Oblast) all over Wikipedia
Disambiguation :
- Disambiguate project articles and get points
Expand :
- Expand Postage stamps and postal history of Romania
Translate :
- Translate Romania-related articles from the Romanian Wikipedia
- Translate and keep in sync with the project versions in other languages: Projet:Roumanie (in French), Proiect:România (in Romanian), Проект:Румыния (in Russian)
Unreferenced : * Add more reference to FC CFR Timișoara.
Other :
- Make use in articles of the newly contributed images (about 5800!!) from the Wiki Loves Monuments Romania 2011 (WLM Romania external site)
- Review newly created Romania-related articles
- Check the articles needing expert attention or other work, and help with some of the items
- Create Awards for WikiProject Romania
- Contribute photos related to Romania at Commons:WikiProject Romania. Organize Romania related images on Commons. See also media-related tasks

European history

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Stub

I've expanded the article a bit, so I've removed the Stub tags; but if anyone thinks it's still stubby, feel free to put them back. Xyl 54 (talk) 15:32, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bibliography

‘A Personal Narrative’ written by G. Rhodes is hardly an authoritative source, given that it is biased and that its estimates regarding the battle are based on ‘personal notation’ and suggestions, as the author himself made evident on the page cited. It is clearly not in line with Wikipedia:Neutral point of view; dubious figures and prejudiced opinions must not be included into the article. Dolchstoß (talk) 23:45, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Battle of Oltenița. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:38, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"both sides claiming victory"

Now the Lead claims: "The battle was indecisive, with both sides claiming victory." In fact, I did not see the Russian side talking about its undoubted victory. Now there is a link to Orlando's book (Orlando Figes. The Crimean War: A History. Metropolitan Books. 2011. P. 131.) and he, in turn, refers to the memoirs in the magazine "Russian Antiquity" (Russkaia starina). I looked at the page indicated - there is nothing about the "victory", only a mention of "the fight that was near Oltenitsa" and that their military unit was transferred to Oltenitsa after this fight, to reinforce the Russian troops who were already there [1]. In the book of Bogdanovich (Russian historian of the 19th century) I see a detailed investigation into the reasons for the defeat, although the Russians exaggerate the strength of the Turks and their losses to disguise their failure. He sums up: "Our troops did their duty honestly, and that the Turks could not boast of victory; we retreated, and were not repulsed" [2]. Since there is an obvious mistake in Orlando's book, I will remove this statement, especially since the next sentences contain everything that is necessary.--Nicoljaus (talk) 10:11, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Casualties in infobox

Dushnilkin, you have recently added casualty figures to the infobox using Russian language sources which cannot be viewed online (eg here). This creates a number of issues. Firstly, there is now an inconsistency with the body of the article because the article prose was not amended to reflect the addition. Per MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE, the infobox is for a summary of key facts from the article. It is not the place for multiple figures from multiple sources, which is detail. Such a wide variance cannot cannot be simply summarised as a meaningful range. It is now inappropriate to report the casualty figures in the infobox. I also note that at least one citation lacks page numbers. [WP:ONUS]] applies to these edits. If you wish to retain these figure, please incorporate them into the article prose. Cinderella157 (talk) 02:38, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll turn it on, thanks for the comment, but I seem to have indicated pages everywhere, don't I? Dushnilkin (talk) 09:30, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It appears I was mistaken about the page numbers (probably something else I was looking at at the same time) - apologies. Cinderella157 (talk) 10:11, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 09:30, 1 December 2024 edit Dushnilkin (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users 5,948 edits →Casualties in infobox: Reply Tag: Reply ← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 10:11, 1 December 2024 edit undo Cinderella157 (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers 18,106 edits →Casualties in infobox
Line 46:		Line 46:

	:I'll turn it on, thanks for the comment, but I seem to have indicated pages everywhere, don't I? [[User:Dushnilkin\|Dushnilkin]] ([[User talk:Dushnilkin\|talk]]) 09:30, 1 December 2024 (UTC)		:I'll turn it on, thanks for the comment, but I seem to have indicated pages everywhere, don't I? [[User:Dushnilkin\|Dushnilkin]] ([[User talk:Dushnilkin\|talk]]) 09:30, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
			::It appears I was mistaken about the page numbers (probably something else I was looking at at the same time) - apologies. [[User:Cinderella157\|Cinderella157]] ([[User talk:Cinderella157\|talk]]) 10:11, 1 December 2024 (UTC)