Talk:Ambrose Burnside

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.
This article is supported by the Military work group.
MILHIST 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 lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.
Maintained The following user(s) are actively involved with this article and may be able to help with questions about verification and sources:
Hlj (Hal Jespersen) (talk • watchlist • email)
This in no way implies article ownership; all editors are encouraged to contribute.

Moving from "Ambrose Everett Burnside" to "Ambrose Burnside". BLANKFAZE | (что??) 01:41, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Good article Ambrose Burnside has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.

Contents

[edit] Successful good article nomination

I am glad to say that this article which was nominated for good article status has succeeded. This is how the article, as of July 4, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Yes, good standard of prose, appropriate use of military terms.
2. Factually accurate?: Plenty of reliable published sources per WP:V and WP:RS.
3. Broad in coverage?: Lengthy and detailed.
4. Neutral point of view?: Some problems here, especially in the "Assessment and legacy" section - would be better to quote from sources rather than stating just one opinion. Not enough to fail GA, however.
5. Article stability? Yes.
6. Images?: Appropriate public-domain image used.

If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to a GA review. Thank you to all of the editors who worked hard to bring it to this status. — Waltontalk 13:26, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Carbine?

Personally, I was surprised not to see any mention of Burnside's firearms design. He designed the breechloading Burnside carbine. Produced in Massachusetts, the design, although based on the earlier Hall breechloader, was quite innovative and was issued to (and fairly popular with) many union cavalry units. His credit as a firearms designer was probably instrumental in his selection as the first presdient of the National Rifle Association.

Feel free to edit, but the carbine is mentioned in the second paragraph of the Early life section. Hal Jespersen 01:16, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Bridges

Is it me, or did Ambrose Burnside, in his spectacularly brief career in the spotlight on the US Civil War, have a fixation on bridges? There's Antietam's lower bridge, as we all know well by his name attached to it, which he had to purchase in human flesh because he didn't realize that his trooops could ford the river. Then at Fredericksburg, he declined a frontal assault on the Confederate positions until pontoon bridges could be recieved from Henry Halleck, the overall Union Army supply commander. In both instances, his fixation on bridges resulted in higher casualties inflicted upon his men, and in the case of Fredericksburg, a ghastly and horrific bloodbath that could have been avoided. (I don't award the near-bungle at Antietam to him, because the gravest threat to the Union Army, George McClellan, was in overall command at that point.) Could anyone offer support/insight on this for me?

I do not really see the point of this line of argument. Virtually all Civil War generals had to deal with bridges in one way or another. Also, Burnside's career was not as short as some believe -- he was active in North Carolina, Tennessee, and the Overland Campaign. I do not claim he was a very successful general, but he did not completely burn out and disappear as many of his contemporaries did. Hal Jespersen 15:26, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Burnside was a very competent officer in smaller actions which he could oversee personally. His actions early in the war showed initiative and skill and he'd have made a good Brigadier General to be entrusted with carrying out orders. Unfortunately he was promoted beyond his level of skill (and comfort). To his credit he was aware of this.

[edit] Ironic comment

General Burnside wins the prize for the most ironic man to ever exist.

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y179/joeblade/irony.jpg

It's not irony, the term "sideburns" comes from his name.

[edit] GA Sweeps (Pass)

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force. I have made a few minor alterations to the grammar in places, and the lead would benefit from further expansion, as currently it does really not do the article justice (see WP:LEAD for more info on this).

However, I believe the article still meets the GA criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. The article history has been updated to reflect this review. Regards, EyeSereneTALK 13:12, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Three cheers

Since I live in Rhode Island as he did, I say we give a hand to Burnside, one of the best Union generals in the Civil War. 72.221.69.79 (talk) 02:34, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Last name

Are we sure his last name isn't Sideburn? It sure seems like it. ~RayLast «Talk!» 18:23, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

We are sure. Hal Jespersen (talk) 18:43, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sideburn-Burnside

There isn't a source to back up the statement that sideburns comes from his name. How do we know it's true? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.142.67.95 (talk) 23:46, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

The little number [22] at the end of the sentence is a footnote with a citation to a source. Hal Jespersen (talk) 00:35, 23 May 2008 (UTC)