Talk:Little Round Top

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following users are actively contributing to this topic and may be able to help with questions about verification and sources: Hlj (Hal Jespersen) (talk • watchlist • email)

[edit] Holman Melcher

To the anonymous user who keeps putting accounts of Holman Melcher's gallantry into the [too] many pages that describe this battle: Simply reading an account from one self-interested guy that he was the one responsible for something is insufficient to warrant inclusion in an article. Check out the Desjardin book referenced in the main article, p 69, for a description of what a reputable historian says Melcher did, which was in no way insignificant, but not worthy of special mention here, which by its very nature detract's from Chamberlain's role. I would be willing to consider an alternative view if you can produce a few real historians who would back Melcher's claim. Try Desjardin, Pullen, Coddington, Pfanz, Sears, McPherson, Gallagher, Trudeau, Hartwig, Bearss, Catton, or Foote. And the use of the phrase "there is controversy" should be reserved for controversy between such historians, not between Melcher and the rest of history (or between two Wikipedia editors). Hal Jespersen 00:54, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Reverted again. Three points:

1. None of the References cited describe circumstances contrary to the text here.
2. The text does not claim that Chamberlain "led" the charge. He ordered it.
3. The Medal of Honor was for the defense of LRT, not simply the famous charge, so denigrating the medal over a dispute about who led that part of the battle is misleading.

Hal Jespersen 21:25, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

I apologize for constanting putting in the Melcher comments...I just found the discussion section. I'm relatively new to Wikipedia, I was wondering why my input kept disappearing, but you make a good point. I agree, Chamberlain's defense was unquestionable in holding Little Round Top. I also think he was a bit more of an articulate, self promoter than other lesser known men in the 20th Maine (he was a rhetoric professor and politician after all). There seems to be a great deal of doubt surrounding Chamberlain's claims about ordering the charge, or even ordering "bayonets." Melcher, Ellis Spear and other educated members of the 20th Maine question Chamberlain's claims about organizing/ordering the offensive, as they describe an impulsive charge led by Melcher...not the Chamberlain charge pictured in the movie and other literature. I just wanted people to be aware of the controversy surrounding the common misperceptions of Little Round Top and Chamberlain's myth. I'll try to refrain from any more Melcher comments, until I get more current historians to cite. Thanks for the info.

OK, Mr/Ms New Editor. I am actually quite skeptical of Chamberlain myself, although you will find people lurking here who come close to hero worship. I am not averse to raising doubts, but they need to be within a few guidelines. Vague refs to "recent historians" won't cut it when there is a list of explicit historians in the References section who all agree on the counter-point. Wikipedia has policies about injecting new research into articles; see Wikipedia:No original research to start. My own editing policy is that I try to get all the facts in the article to be findable in the works cited under References and then if there's some controversial item, I also footnote to a specific reference. Check out how this was done in Stonewall Jackson about the subject of lemons. Hal Jespersen 16:44, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "Paddy" O'Rorke

I saw you reverted the edit of "Paddy" O'Rorke's name. Most people referred to him as Paddy. If you care so much about the name, perhaps you shoudl create his currently empty page. evrik 15:49, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

I haven't written one yet because (1) I have an enormous to-do list ahead of him; (2) I have little biographical info available. The format of his name is one I typically use in hundreds of ACW articles. Similar to Thomas J. "Stonewall" Jackson, William F. "Baldy" Smith, or William E. "Grumble" Jones. The issue is not the name of the article (which can be whatever its author creates), but how it is referenced in other pages. And your edit deleted info that I think is useful. Hal Jespersen 16:14, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

My edit left the reference "Patrick H. O'Rorke" intact, but only changed the visible name, "'Paddy' O'Rorke". I'm not going to get into a p-match over this one.evrik 16:18, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

No p-ing intended, but if you reread my comment, you'll see it is the externally visible name I was concerned with, not the name of the article, which I said could be assigned by its eventual author. Hal Jespersen 22:39, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] vandalism

Anonymous user 150.134.73.71 has been making widespread edits to battle articles that are gratuitous punctuation changes and links for officers that do not meet the style we have established for American Civil War articles. Although I have been accommodating some of the substantive changes that go along with this blizzard of editing, it is an annoying burden to have to sift through the gratuitous parts, and I will consider continuation of these anonymous edits to be vandalism and revert them entirely without comment. If the anonymous user would like to contact me on my talk page, I would be happy to explain why his or her edits are disruptive. Hal Jespersen 22:49, 16 September 2006 (UTC)