Talk:Battle of Ligny

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.

Start

This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

Additional information and associated task forces:

	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: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met
Associated task forces (nations and regions):
	French military history task force
Associated task forces (periods and conflicts):
	Napoleonic era task force (c. 1792–1815)

1 6eme coalition
2 St Amand
3 One of the sadder things here in Wiki
4 Schlacht bei Ligny
5 Spelling

[edit] 6eme coalition

Can someone tell me what the war of 6eme coalition was? -- Zoe

6ème is just French for 6th. The Napoleonic Wars can be divided into a series of "coalitions" of different sides (the 6th was Russia and Britain vs France) but I think a link to Napoleonic Wars itself should suffice. -- Someone else 05:20 Dec 12, 2002 (UTC)

Thanks. -- Zoe

You're welcome! Thanks for keeping up with the Battle-Bot<G> -- Someone else 05:41 Dec 12, 2002 (UTC)

[edit] St Amand

and a some of 2nd Corps to attack St. Amaund, Is this correct because most of the II Corps (if not all) was with Ney. Philip Baird Shearer 02:27, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

As no one has answered, Using this source http://www.waterloo-campaign.nl/june16/ligny.3.pdf I have changed the wording --Philip Baird Shearer 18:54, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I am currently at work Phillip I will check in against PH and make sure that it is correct if that is ok with you? Tirronan 21:39, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Of course it is. As I am using an Internet source, it is much batter to have it checked with a more reliable source. --Philip Baird Shearer 07:02, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] One of the sadder things here in Wiki

One of the sadder things in wiki is that if the battle didn't have the British in it and its English Wiki it is a stub... this is one of the worst examples though Liepzig was actually worse before I started expanding it. I am going to work on this one and I would sure like a hand in doing so. Tirronan 01:18, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Most English-speaking readers / contributors probably aren't interested in battles their own countrymen didn't fight in. Ligny is widely perceived I think as an ally's incidental defeat on the road to Waterloo, and hence not very interesting.Tirailleur 12:20, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

For a quickfix as the German Wikipedia has a much more comprehensive version, I suggest that the text of the German article is run throught Google translate and hand fetteled to flesh out this article quickley. --Philip Baird Shearer 16:58, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Having worked to fix the Malmady Trial article translated from French its a fix but not very quick, I spent 4 days fixing the English to resemble our language. Tirronan 18:40, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do to continue expansion on the article, PH's 1st book on the Waterloo campaign goes into the battle in great depth and should be of help here. Tirronan —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tirronan (talk • contribs) 19:23, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Schlacht bei Ligny

Tirronan and I have made a large expansion based on de:Schlacht bei Ligny (the German version) and other informaion from Battle of Waterloo article and the Waterloo Campaign. The Army section was written by by Tirronan --Philip Baird Shearer 07:39, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunatly de:Schlacht bei Ligny does not cite its sources, so there is still lots of work to --Philip Baird Shearer 08:37, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I have edited some of language but nothing 'plotwise'...there are some repetitive sections however, and I wonder if the 'Aftermath' section is not rather too detailed? It's still a very good article though; Ligny was in fact a very important battle and has remained in the shadows for too long; my compliments to the above editors. --{User:Summitscribbler, 15:01, 27 February 2008.

I have an English version of Peter Hofschroer's work so it can be cited but at the moment I am working up the French Invasion of Russia and have Jutland to take on after that... my plate is a bit full right now. --Tirronan (talk) 04:02, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Spelling

When I helped make a large expansion to this article in September 2007 I used American English. I notice that someone has re-written it using British English. One needs to look to the version before September last year to see what the original English used in this article was. See "13:21, 1 November 2004" I introduced the word "centre" so BE it is. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 13:21, 25 March 2008 (UTC)