Talk:Battle of Copenhagen (1807)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject Norway, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Norway. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

	Denmark Portal Battle of Copenhagen (1807) falls within the scope of WikiProject Denmark, a project to create and improve Denmark-related Wikipedia articles. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, all interested editors are welcome!
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. (FAQ). (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
High	This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.

	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.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Related task forces (general topics): Maritime warfare task force Related task forces (nations and regions): British military history task force Nordic military history task force Related task forces (periods and conflicts): Napoleonic era task force (c. 1792–1815)

Of the battleships which reached England, only 4 - Christian VII 80, Dannemark 74, Norge 74 and Princess Carolina 74 - were taken into British service.

Under what names were these ships commissioned into the Royal Navy? Bastie 04:47, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Is there an external source to verify the last paragraph? This smacks of historical myth, so it would be good practice to back it up. - KD

I would imagine that the last paragraph was taken from the "Historical Notes" to Sharpe's Prey by Bernard Cornwell It certainly reads very similar. -Harlsbottom 00:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

It's unsourced, and I concur on it being "too good to be true", so I've taken it out for now. Shimgray | talk | 01:02, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

It wasn't just similar, it was identical ... along with most of the article. I've tagged the article as a copyvio. Bah! CWC(talk) 05:27, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for removing the copyvio material. Valentinian ^{(talk) / (contribs)} 13:03, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] General Wellesley

Is is just me or does this read oddly and seem inconsistent? We have General Lord Cathcart but General Wellesley - dropping the 'Sir Arthur' Personally I'd remove both ranks as they were both mostly known by their titles, being as much politicians as generals. Alci12 23:16, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Lord Cathcart held a hereditary title and so was properly called Captain Lord Cathcart, Colonel Lord Cathcart, etc. Wellesley's proper style at the time was "Major-General The Rt Hon. Sir Arthur Wellesley, KB" (see Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington#Styles), for which General Wellesley is the proper short form. CWC(talk) 05:27, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Crown Prince

Shouldn't the words "Crown Prince" link to Frederick VI of Denmark, rather than to an explanation of the phrase? -KO

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.241.122.39 (talk • contribs).

Fixed. Well spotted. Valentinian ^{T / C} 21:04, 14 March 2007 (UTC)