Talk:Battle of Buckhead Creek

Military history: North America / United States / American Civil War

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 a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	American Civil War task force

Confederate casualty estimate

A recent edit places scrutiny on the current estimate of Confederate casualties at Buck Head Creek. It is apparent that the 600 number is an exaggeration that has been repeated in many sources without critical analysis. However, there are several problems with the edit: 1. The edit appears to have been done by the author of the cite. 2. I'm looking for some other verification of the claim that "Wheeler and his command reported no casualties for this battle." Instead, in the O.R. SERIES I--VOLUME XLIV S# 92, pub. 1893, page 910) I find Wheeler reported "Our own loss about 70, including the gallant General Robertson, severely wounded" (the latter confirmed in Warner's Generals in Gray p. 261.) 3. The 600 value isn't as claimed by the edit, it comes from Kilpatrick's report of Nov. 30, 1864. It is Kilpatrick's estimate which of course makes it highly dubious since he was withdrawing and had no reasonable way to determine how much damage was inflicted. 4. The edit is set up in argument format and should be made more encyclopedic (e.g. Kilpatrick claimed 600, Wheeler reported 70, etc.) And the info box value should indicate the uncertainty in some fashion. Red Harvest (talk) 09:05, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The 600 number is at the end of a report about the entire expedition, Nov 24 to 28, including night time conflicts at Sylvan Grove and south of Waynesboro, so in fairness to Kilpatrick, it may have included more than just Buck Head Creek. It might still be on the high side but not as drastic. HWG311SB (talk) 22:11, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]