Talk:Rifles in the American Civil War

Firearms Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firearms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of firearms 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.FirearmsWikipedia:WikiProject FirearmsTemplate:WikiProject FirearmsFirearms articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Technology / Weaponry / 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:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	American Civil War task force

This article was the subject of an educational assignment that ended on 17 July 2008. Further details are available here.

Rename

In accordance with Siege artillery in the American Civil War and Field artillery in the American Civil War, this should probably be renamed something like Rifles in the American Civil War, though to perhaps to avoid another article Muskets in the American Civil War, Shotguns in the American Civil War, etc, just turn this into Small arms in the American Civil War. Joshdboz (talk) 15:36, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Invention of the rifled barrel

I am not sure I want to presume to edit the article myself as I am unsure of the actual details. I would however like to question the claim the the rifled barrel was invented in 1855. The rifled barrel had been around for centuries prior to this. I would say it was first used in large numbers in the Napoleonic wars, the most obvious example being the Baker Rifle, though this was still restricted to relatively specialist units.

I would suggest it was the invention of the Minie ball that actually rendered the smoothbore obsolete, as this greatly decreased the reload time of most such weapons. According to the relevant article, this was reportedly invented in the 1840's. It is hard therefore to see how the 1855 date is in any way relevant.

I would like to read other peoples views on this first but am tempted to research it and make corrections, if nobody else gets there first. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.38.118.188 (talk) 16:24, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1863 Remington Zouave

Shouldn't the 1863 Remington be in here?

http://www.antiquearmsinc.com/remington-zouave-rifle.htm Stevetac (talk) 01:35, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Lorenz Rifle.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:54, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Springfield Model 1863.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:20, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Whitworth rifle.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:42, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:09, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A mess

This is not the type of article to have a personal disagreement with an author, with lengthy prose ("He doesnt understand high school physics) in addition to blatant untruths with no citations ("US Civil War casualties from large battles accounted for fewer casualties in the war overall than daily grind of casualties incurred from skirmishing during picket duty and in circumstances of contact") — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.159.178.16 (talk) 06:41, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, I came across this article randomly (I am not an expert in any way) and was struck by how strange that section was. That's why I'm even on this talk page. One paragraph briefly stating Guelzo's viewpoint followed by seven attacking him. It honestly seems like the page is being used as a strange way to air a grievance. 98.168.49.156 (talk) 05:56, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]