Jump to content

Talk:Battle of Peking (1900)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

American forces

[edit]

There was alot more that 1,000 Americans involved in this battle. The China Relief Expedition article says four regiments of US Marines and US soldiers participated meaning there was more like 10,000 or more Americans involved. Also, someone removed the part of the article which featured a description of the siege and replaced with only information regarding the final battle at Peking. This page needs alot of work.--$1LENCE D00600D (talk) 21:27, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Muslim Braves?

[edit]

Removed a large piece of the entry that had to do with the presence of Muslim troops who caused the westerners to "shiver in fear." This entry could use a good deal of work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.83.128.60 (talk) 23:01, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Irrelevant + Inaccurate depiction of facts =zero academic quality

[edit]

The academic quality of this article has been very seriously damaged by recent additions. Firstly, the sources supposedly describing "The Battle of Peking" are not relevant to the Battle of Peking itself. The diary account of B.L.P. Weale provides only one eye-witness account of events occuring inside Peking - Weale was not describing the relief force heading to Peking. Descriptions such as "one French had his face blown off" and "The Italians Lieutenant was severely wounded and Italian dead bodies were lost and never found again" are ungrammatical, or introduce irrelevant details to the subject of this article. Some alleged facts are unreferenced ("Intense Chinese Sniper fire roared around the French legation and Su Wang Fu. the Chinese constantly kept up the sniper barrage") and have no bearing with regard to time or date of these occurences. The assertion that the "The foreign casualty rate was beyond the 200% mark" is not substantiated by evidence.

This article(and the others on the Boxer Rebellion) needs urgent rectification. Illdz (talk) 01:23, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retitling Article

[edit]

It is confusing because there are so many articles about battles in and around Peking, Beijing, and Peiping (all the same place). I would propose retitling this article to "Battle of Peking (1900). The would place the article in a definite time period and avoid confusion about what may have happened at other times and in other battles.

I likewise agree that this article needs work. Perhaps I'll take a whack at it as there are many good sources. Smallchief (talk) 11:56, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Historical books

[edit]

Tong Tekong, scholar, historian and university lecturer, Hou Yijie, scholar, historian and writer of university text books, Wang Shuzhen, history books writer, and Jin Manluo, and their books cover 10 to 70 years of Manchu Empire history, and yet, none of their books were being cited in all the Boxer Protocol related articles. Put it this way, their books cover many important historical topics, and Yihetuan is just part of them. Discussion is open now. Arilang talk 03:26, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Too many Primary Sources

[edit]

I reluctantly put a Primary Sources tag on the article, which needs better sourcing in secondary sources. These primary sources which should be replaced: Daggett, Brig. Gen. A. S. (1903); Savage Landor, A. Henry (1901). China and the Allies; Lynch, George (1901). The War of the Civilizations; Chamberlin, Wilbur J. (1903). Ordered to China; Story, Douglas (1907). To-morrow in the East.

In addition, I'm not sure that the English Wikipedia Additional Reading wants Russian language works, especially eye-witness accounts, , Д.Г.Янчевецкий "У стен недвижного Китая". Санкт-Петербург - Порт-Артур, 1903 (D.G.Yanchevetskiy "Near the Walls of Unmoving China", Sankt-Peterburg - Port-Artur, 1903); В. Г. Дацышен «Русско-китайская война 1900 года. Поход на Пекин» — СПБ, 1999. ISBN 5-8172-0011-2(V.G. Datsishen "Russo-Chinese war of 1900. March to Beijing", Sankt-Peterburg, 1999). ch (talk) 00:59, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agree Russian language eye-witness accounts are of little use to English readers. Over to you ...  Philg88 ♦talk 06:33, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If there is an English translation available that should be used instead. Otherwise it is of little, if any benefit. Mediatech492 (talk) 15:51, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Battle of Peking (1900). 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After 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 these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 19:52, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Battle of Peking (1900). 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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After 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 these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 04:46, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fort Voyron

[edit]

In 1900s and also later was a fort named after the french general Régis Voyron. see french WP. --178.197.230.144 (talk) 23:58, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Battle_of_Peking_(1900)&oldid=1206178627"