Talk:Battle of Ridgeway

Canada: Ontario C‑class Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Ontario portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ontario.

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Canadian / North America C‑class

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

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

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

Associated task forces:
/
	Canadian military history task force
	North American military history task force

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on June 2, 2012 and June 2, 2016.

Untitled

Canada West

Is it normal in Wikipedia to use the historical terms for places as opposed to the modern names? If the former is the norm, then how about changing "Ridgeway, Canada West" so that only the word Ridgeway is a link to the Ridgeway Ontario page and the "Canada West" words are a link to the Canada West page (my bad for not searching for that in the first place, I guess I assumed that since it wasn't linked, it didn't exist.) Cheers, CraigWyllie 02:35, 21 August 2006 (UTC) (edited 18:55 Aug 20 2006 as 65.92.174.114)[reply]

It is customary to use placenames contemporary to the events being described in historical articles. The actual link on the name leads to Ridgeway, Ontario, so anyone wanting to find out more would have little difficulty. Geoff NoNick 12:44, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Victory

The comment on Geoff NoNick's revert today claims that it was a British victory. However the "Infobox Military Conflict" states that it was a Fenian victory. The text states "The Ridgeway victory was complemented by a second successful engagement later that day at Fort Erie" - and the "battle" at Fort Erie was clealry a Fenian victory. The "Battle at Fort Erie" page states reflects that statement, and also states that the Battle of Ridgeway was a Fenian victory. Even though I'm Canadian I'm inclined to agree. The Fenians retired from the field after the Canadians had fled but did so for reasons not connected to the action itself. It does seem to be true that it was a close battle, reading the Queens Own Rifiles External Link indicates that had the Canadians not paniced they may have carried the day, and the number of casualties were low on both sides.

I'd like to see the sentence "The Ridgeway victory was complemented by a second successful engagement later that day at Fort Erie" reworded, as no-where else in the main body of the article does it clearly state whose victory it was (other than the infobox, and I missed that the first time I read the page). I find the sentence a bit inelegant. Cheers, CraigWyllie 02:35, 21 August 2006 (UTC) (edited 18:55 Aug 20 2006 as 65.92.174.114)[reply]

Agreed - my apologies for not noticing the incongrueties before. Perhaps "The inconclusive engagement at Ridgeway was followed by a Fenian victory at Fort Erie later that day." Geoff NoNick 12:44, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

fenian uniforms what kind of uniforms would the fenians have worn would it have been the greenish coloured uniform shown in the picture —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bouse23 (talk • contribs) 16:45, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Battle of Ridgeway. 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) 20:31, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Battle of Ridgeway. 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ridgewaybattle.ca/casualties.htm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ridgewaybattle.ca/
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050830060555/http://www.qor.com/history/ridgeway.html to http://www.qor.com/history/ridgeway.html

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) 05:22, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]