Talk:List of World War I battles

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Military history (Rated Redirect-Class)
MILHIST This redirect page 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. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Redir Redirect pages do not require a rating on the quality assessment scale.

2008[edit]

Hi Jethro, Good work. I'd suggest that the article could be improved by not automatically numbering within each month as you have now. It would be better to use the actual date of the battle to show the sequence e.g.

For longer battles, perhaps start and end dates.
Nunquam Dormio (talk) 15:54, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

thanks very much! i shall get to work right away! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jethrothompson (talkcontribs) 17:01, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Hopefully you'll find this to your satisfaction! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jethrothompson (talkcontribs) 17:51, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Excellent start! You may find this article just keeps expanding as there are many more battles that the English Wikipedia doesn't cover yet. Nunquam Dormio (talk) 19:10, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

1914[edit]

Why is this year not represented? Rklawton (talk) 20:43, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

This seems to be covered now. I'm marking this as  Done --BjKa (talk) 10:49, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Suggestion for layout[edit]

Hello.
I am very much new to Wikipedia (I am involved in other wikis - minor stuff really.)
I feel that the layout of this page is inefficient and confusing. For starters, it only includes dates when the battle begins, and one has to click on the link to access data about the battle, if a link actually exists.
I would like to suggest a new layout for battles in general, which I believe would make the entire system much easier to read and (possibly) edit. Instead of having a list, I would like to suggest a table, perhaps similar to the table here.
The values would be a numeric value for chronological ordering, the name of the battle, location, date of starting and date of ending, and some other information.
For the other information, I am personally divided as to how it should be set out. Either, on the left, we have the victorious combatants and on the right, the defeated combatants, or, on the left, the Entente and the right, the Central Powers, and then in the centre would be the outcome. Also, detailed in the boxes for the combatants would be the size of each force, and the casualties inflicted to each side.
This would (I hope) lead to easier information gathering and statistics, and while more in-depth information could be accessed on the pages themselves, the superficial information is able to be accessed by a reader much easier than having to click on each available battle to receive information.
Does this sound possible or useful to anyone else? I would be willing to (try to) make the template, but I would like to hear opinions before I go in all guns blazing to change the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Felbah (talkcontribs) 23:42, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

"Battle of the Bulge" ?[edit]

I took the following sentence out of the picture caption at July 1917:
"The battle of Ypres was also known as the 'Battle of the Bulge,' because of the bulge effect it had on the lines of allied trenches."
I have only ever heard the term Battle of the Bulge in connection with WWII, while the Flanders theater has always been referred to as the "Ypres Salient". I checked the three articles for the Battles of Ypres, and none of them contains the word "bulge". So unless someone provides a valid source, (pre 1940's, mind you!) I call bullshit. --BjKa (talk) 10:41, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of World War I battles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete the "External links modified" sections if they want, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:16, 28 December 2017 (UTC)