Talk:War of 1812

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Former featured article candidate War of 1812 is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
March 1, 2004 Featured article candidate Not promoted


This article has a huge number of grammatical errors. There are many run-on sentences and sentence fragments. It needs a thorough rewrite. User: (talk) 05:18, 23 October 2017‎ (UTC)

Student course[edit]

We are going to have to make sure the upcoming edits that may be large are carefully reviewed. see 2018 course. We may get a SLU of opinionated essay writing.--Moxy (talk) 23:33, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

User:Rjensen can you review what is bellow see if there is anything we can keep that does not already repeat what we already say.--Moxy (talk) 22:07, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
it seems to miss all the First Nations--perhaps they assume those folks aren't really canadians, or perhaps because they were clearly losers and would complicate the victory parade. Rjensen (talk) 23:42, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Hi Rjensen, Moxy - I was a little confused at first as to what happened to my post below, as it initially gave off the impression that my post had been completely removed. I now see that it was added to the end of the content that you removed. I'm not objecting to keeping this all in one section per se, but please make sure that moved comments are easy to see and that you let the person in question know that you are moving them. I've also collapsed the content since there's so much of it and because it made the move that much harder to detect. (Sorry, it's the admin in me talking!)
In any case, can you give a clearer explanation as to why the content was removed and why it should not be re-added? The class's professor is still curious as to the content's removal, as he and the students believed that the material they wanted to add, specifically on the British memory and the experience of French Canadians as far as the war is concerned, wasn't already in the article (or at least wasn't visible). Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:39, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
  • I'm going to move my original comment to this portion rather than moved to the end of the additions section, where it isn't easily found (especially as it's now collapsed by me).
Hi Moxy, I wanted to start up a conversation between you and the students Emilioluna and Aashna18 on the talk page. A few days ago you reverted their additions to the article here, with the summary "Best student additions are reviewed on the talk page before being published". We encourage students to post to article talk pages first, but it's not something that is absolutely required of them since it's generally not a requirement on Wikipedia. Could you provide more clarity as to what was wrong with the content that would require its removal? Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:21, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
Something I do kind of want to caution about is automatically assuming (and posting about it on the notice board) that the student content will be persuasive opinion essays. I know that there have been some issues with this with other classes, but I don't want student work to be automatically considered unusable. Basically I don't want student work to get special treatment, but neither do I want them to be treated differently from other editors or automatically be assumed that their work will be bad from the get-go. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:46, 7 May 2018 (UTC)


Extended content

The War of 1812 does not feature prominently in contemporary British memory. The attitude held by Britons during 1812 – that the war existed on the periphery of their ongoing battles against Napoleon – has translated to modern memory of the conflict. Whereas the war facilitated the growth and consolidation of a national identity for Americans, British identity was more heavily forged during war against Napoleonic France[1]. During his 2012 visit to the White House, then-British Prime Minister David Cameron joked that:

"We so much more prefer talking about defeating the French."[2].

In the 19th century, William Kingsford posited that:

"The events of the War of 1812 have not been forgotten in England, for they have never been known there."[3]

Following the War of 1812, Britain focused more upon Europe, believing that it would play a more significant role in shaping its future than North America [4] This contributed to the absence of the war within British memory.

Although the War of 1812 plays a significant role in American and Canadian public history, there is only one British monument commemorating the conflict. The Ross Monument in County Down, Northern Ireland memorialises British Major-General Robert Ross who fought in the Napoleonic Wars and perished at the Battle of Baltimore in September 1812. [File:A_new_map_of_Upper_and_Lower_Canada_from_the_latest_authorities.jpg|link=undefined|right|461x461px|An 1807 Map of Upper and Lower Canada ]]

In the decades before the onset of the War of 1812, attitudes between the French Canadiens, primarily in Lower Canada, and the British Canadians, primarily in Upper Canada, ranged from a heavy indifference, to a mutually mild distaste, to suspicions of colluding with external powers.

Canadien opinions from all classes essentially agreed that, while not ideal, British dominion was favorable to any French and American alternatives. The elite seigneurs of Lower Canada had a particular disdain for the French Revolution because they had seen it attack both aristocracy and their Catholic Church.[5] The common habitant, though opposed to British rule[5], did not see the value in risking their lives and livelihoods by fighting.[6] However, having both traded with and been frequently cheated by Americans, many in Québec were wrought with distaste for their neighbors to the south.[5]

Meanwhile, the British-Canadian opinion of their French-speaking counterparts was one of distrust stemming from a widespread belief that the Québécois would revolt against the British or fight alongside potential French invaders.[7] And yet, despite the general British distrust, the Canadian Constitution treated the Québécois with more dignity than had the trammels of Bourbon French rule.[6] Furthermore, the British Governor Prevost felt that Lower Canada could only be held with the support of its Francophone population.[8] Therefore, the Canadian Government began to use the press in a calculated way to disparage the French Canadiens, particularly their lack of honor, suspect military capabilities, and supposed sloth.[9] Such attacks moved the population of Lower Canada; the impending war thus became an opportunity for the Québécois to refute such allegations from the British Canadian government.[10]

Though Governor Prevost attempted to claim credit for the victory of Charles de Salaberry and his voltigeurs at the October 1813 Battle of Châteauguay[11], the successful repulsion of American troops was conducive to a surge in both the pride and nationalist sentiments of French Canada.[9] The much-propagated tale of de Salaberry’s victory not only bolstered nationalist sentiment in Québec, it also satiated the fears of British authorities that Lower Canada was a traitorous province, unwilling to defend Canada as their Anglophone counterparts would. The French Canadiens, however, felt that their allegiance was to themselves and their own best interests, not to the idea of a Canada unified against foreign threats.[9]

Not only did the war not solidify allegiance to the British Empire, the Canadian Legislative Assembly became gridlocked, strife-laden grounds for infighting between Catholic Lower Canadian and Protestant Upper Canadian partisans.[7][12]

Hi Moxy, I wanted to start up a conversation between you and the students Emilioluna and Aashna18 on the talk page. A few days ago you reverted their additions to the article here, with the summary "Best student additions are reviewed on the talk page before being published". We encourage students to post to article talk pages first, but it's not something that is absolutely required of them since it's generally not a requirement on Wikipedia. Could you provide more clarity as to what was wrong with the content that would require its removal? Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:21, 24 April 2018 (UTC)


  1. ^
  2. ^
  3. ^ J. C. A. Stagg, The War of 1812: Conflict for a Continent, (USA, 2012), 12
  4. ^ Wilbur Devereux Jones, ‘A British View of the War of 1812 and the Peace Negotiations’, The Mississippi Valley Historical Review, 45, (1958), 487 (
  5. ^ a b c Taylor, Alan (2011). The Civil War of 1812: American Citizens, British Subjects, Irish Rebels, & Indian Allies. New York: Vintage Books. pp. 77, 91. ISBN 1400042658. 
  6. ^ a b Greenwood, F. Murray (Frank Murray), (1993). Legacies of fear : law and politics in Quebec in the era of the French revolution. Toronto: Osgoode Society. pp. 196, 201–202. ISBN 0802069746. OCLC 29910091. 
  7. ^ a b Sellar, Robert, (1974). The tragedy of Quebec; the expulsion of its Protestant farmers. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. pp. 92, 139. ISBN 9780802020680. OCLC 922521. 
  8. ^ Carstens., Patrick Richard; Sanford, Timothy L. (2011). SEARCHING FOR THE FORGOTTEN WAR : 1812. Sanford, Timothy L. (Archivist). Philadelphia: Xlibris Corporation. p. 295. ISBN 1456867539. OCLC 786161408. 
  9. ^ a b c Auger, Martin F. (2001) "French Canadian Participation in the War of 1812: A Social Study of the Voltiguers Canadians," Canadian Military History: Vol. 10: Iss. 3, Article 3. Available at:
  10. ^ Ouellet, Fernand (1971). Histoire economique et sociale du quebec 1760-1850 (in French). Montreal: Fides. p. 232. 
  11. ^ Kingsford, William (1887). The History of Canada. Toronto: Rowsell & Hutchison. p. 369. 
  12. ^ Mann, Susan, (2002). The Dream of Nation (2nd ed ed.). Montréal: McGill-Queen's University Press. p. 60. ISBN 077352410X. OCLC 768254799. 

date of war declaration[edit]

The interoduction contains the sentence

On June 18, 1812, United States President James Madison, after receiving heavy pressure from the War Hawks in Congress, signed the American declaration of war into law.[13] Footnote 13 ( [ contains the date 19 (not 18) june delivers the full text ... saying June 19 ; ... the same.

here is a photo of the document: nineteenth .

The mistake is there since 29 Dec. 2001 (the date @The Epopt: started the article. --Neun-x (talk) 07:50, 7 June 2018 (UTC) --Neun-x (talk) 05:09, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Declaration Act signed by Madison on June 18
I am not a US Constitutional expert, but my understanding is that Congress is the one to declare war, as they did on June 18th and that declaration was signed by Madison on June 18th (see lower left of the image). Madison then issued a Proclamation of the declaration of war on the following day. Thus the state of war existed from June 18 but was only proclaimed by the President on June 19. Dabbler (talk) 13:07, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 June 2018[edit]

Change "Republican" to "Democratic-Republican". The use of the word "Republican" to describe a political party in this article is anachronistic and confusing. The "Republican" political party did not exist until 1854. The Democratic-Republican party actually became the Democratic Party. An acceptable alternative to "Democratic-Republican" is "Jefferson-Republican", though it is less precise. (talk) 14:46, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

 Question: Can you please be more specific as to where you would like this change made? Both "Democratic-Republican" and "Republican" appear in the article. —KuyaBriBriTalk 15:44, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 Not done: due to requesting editor not answering request for clarification. —KuyaBriBriTalk 14:21, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Indians, Native Americans, Indigenous Americans and American Indians[edit]

The article references Indians 82 times, Native Americans eleven times, American Indians six times, and indigenous peoples three times. Given this, and given the contention around the naming conventions and the debate between historical and accurate, is there a standard across Wikipedia for the referencing of indigenous Americans? Is there a reason that there are different names across this one article? Should there be one standard, or is there a logic behind having multiple ways to refer to indigenous Americans.  Matt Sylvester  Talk  04:53, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

That's a good question. Hundreds of editors contributed to this article, bringing many different perspectives. Wikipedia's rule is to follow the reliable sources, and in this case the reliable sources are highly divergent on the terminology for the war of 1812. counts word usage from many thousands of reliable sources, both books and articles. A quick check gives this count:
  • 42,000 "american Indians" "war of 1812"
  • 20.000 "aboriginal" "war of 1812"
  • 12,900 "native americans" "war of 1812"
  • 7,300 "american Indians" "war of 1812"
I recommend the fascinating short discussion by Canadian military historian Carl Benn on how he decided on terms to use at Carl Benn (1998). The Iroquois in the War of 1812. U of Toronto Press. pp. viii–ix.  Benn avoids the word "Indian" because it conjures up subhuman and superhuman stereotypes. He rejects 'aboriginal' and 'native', as transitory and inadequate in the same way that "Amerindian" was used a generation ago. He rejects 'Native-Americans' "because of its dissonance to Canadian ears" and because its too much like 'Italian-American' or 'Irish-American'. All in all, he rejects them all. He tries to rewrite his paragraphs to refer to highly specific tribes or nations, such as the Iroquois. With some trepidation, he does use the terms 'warrior' and 'chief'. Rjensen (talk) 05:41, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
I copied this discussion to Talk:Native Americans in the United States Rjensen (talk) 07:43, 20 June 2018 (UTC)