Talk:Early modern warfare
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Early modern warfare article.|
|Early modern warfare received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.|
File:Vauban-fortress.jpg Nominated for Deletion
|An image used in this article, File:Vauban-fortress.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 2012
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Vauban-fortress.jpg)
In this recent edit, 4 images were added to the lede. They are nice and all, but I'm not sure they are all lede-worthy.
I'm thinking of keeping the "Prussian Infantry" one in the lede as best showing "early modern warfare"; it shows the style of dress of the era, muskets, and marching in formation. The naval one I'm thinking of moving to the Naval section, which currently has no images. The overview of "Battle of White Mountain" I thinking to move to Infantry section; it shows the square and column formation described there. The last image of the 4, "Battle of Vienna", is a little hard to make out; doesn't seem to show much about the period; there are some debris of broken cannons about, but the rest is flags and sword waving -- not much warfare of the age. I'm for removing it.
- After two months, I've moved the pics as I proposed. --A D Monroe III (talk) 20:18, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
Ottoman Empire first in lede?
This edit (re-)added the bullet "The Ottoman Empire's army was the first army to operate guns" to the list of "geographical and chronological terms" for early modern warfare in the lede. It's not sourced, doesn't fit as a list item, not significant to understanding the subject, and AFAIK not true. I reverted it, but the same editor put it back. Per WP:BRD, I'm now discussing it here. (I am also leaving a message on the editor's talk.) If there are no objections after a while, I'll revert it again. --A D Monroe III (talk) 23:36, 5 December 2014 (UTC)