This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Siege of Boston article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Siege of Boston has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Siege of Boston is part of the Boston campaign series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Is it 1941 or 1901 that Evacuation day has been celebrated since? This page conflicts with the entry on the holiday's page. My guess is 1901 is correct, but it would be good to get a source to back that up. WilliamKF 15:56, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
I removed the words "like poop" form the end of the Fortification of Dorchester Heights section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.36.116.37 ( talk) 05:51, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
The article states that Washington reoccupied Breed's and Bunker's hills without opposition, however James Thomas Flexner states in George Washington in the American Revolution (1775-1783) "the sentinels who were visibly manning Bunker Hill had proved, after a gingerly approach and close inspection through glasses, to be dummies holding ruined muskets." This statement wold indicate that prior to the evacuation that at least Bunker Hill and probably Breed's Hill were still in British hands. Danwild6 ( talk) 21:26, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I'm going to review this GA Nom. Intothewoods29 ( talk) 00:32, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
It needs work. I'm putting this On Hold for now, until problems with organization, word choice, relevent information, and pictures (Requirements 1, 3, and 6) are taken care of:
"During this period of time, many Loyalists who lived outside of Boston left their home and fled into the city. Most of them felt that it was not safe to live outside of the city.[8] Some of the men, after arriving in Boston, joined the army.[9]"
- Why didn't all of them feel unsecure outside the city?
- Some of the... Loyalist men joined the army? right? also, which army? picky picky :)
- Another picky thing: in the caption for the second pic, you write that some of the info is incorrect. Then why put it on wikipedia if it's wrong?! LOL that info's already on the pic's info page, so I'd get rid of it on the article page. But that's just me.
"When the Americans heard of this [refering to Gage getting hay], they took the alarm, and the militia came out."
On November 29, Captain John Manley, commanding the schooner Lee, captured one of the most valuable prizes of the war—the British brigantine Nancy carrying much ordnance and military stores for British troops in Boston. The arms, powder and ammunition proved invaluable to the Continental Army during the fortification of Dorchester Heights the following March.
In February, when the water had frozen between Roxborough and Boston Common, Washington thought that in spite of his deficiency in powder he would like to try an assault by a rush across the ice; but his officers again advised against it. His anxiety to risk such a hazardous enterprise arose from his knowledge of the weak condition of his army, which he felt might melt away during the winter, and the ease with which Howe might at any moment break up the patriot besieging line. He had not yet learned how completely he could trust to Howe's inactivity ; and he abandoned the dash across the ice with great reluctance in exchange for a more cautious plan well suited to the British general's temperament, and which was crowned with success
On March 8, a letter was sent to Washington that if allowed to depart unmolested, they had no intention of destroying the town. The letter was not personally addressed to Washington, and therefore, he never received it, but word was spread around
Well, that's about it. Fix those problems and reply on my talk page when you're done. Intothewoods29 ( talk) 01:28, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Good job. Unfortunately, this still has a couple of glaring problems that need to be fixed before it's a GA:
Also, below are a couple more of my picky recommendations; take 'em or leave 'em.
though clearly addressed to Washington, the letter was not personally addressed to him
*In evacuation, you say "A loyalist, Crean Brush, was authorized to take whatever he wanted in return for certificates, which were, at that point, entirely useless." Why? that might be relevant to the article. once again though, you're the expert! :)
And that's about it! I think after these improvements, everything will be ship-shape! Intothewoods29 ( talk) 21:56, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Great... except... the lead should be a summary of the entire article. Right now it's a lot of background information, which is perfect for the Background section! I'd move anything that can go into background from the lead into background, then summarize the article in the lead, and that's it! I promise! LOL but really you've done a great job improving this article. Once you get those lead problems worked out, I'll promote this to GA. :) Intothewoods29 ( talk) 02:52, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Good job! I think you got it all! Keep working to improve this article and others like it. :) Intothewoods29 ( talk) 03:17, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
1.well-organized
2.reliable refs
3. relevant info
4. NPOV
5. stable
6. Pictures have tags
The article text cites April 19th as the start of the siege, but the page is linked from April 20 and not April 19. Which is correct? Did it start overnight? Both the Siege of Boston and April 20 pages list the start as "after the battles of Lexington and Concord." Flwyd ( talk) 06:58, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Nathanael Greene: A Biography of the American Revolution
"Greene and his Rhode Islanders were placed under the command of Major General Charles Lee" (
http://books.google.com/books?id=MfEpwjscMUEC&pg=PT38)
"Now on April 1, 1776 ... He had as yet done nothing spectacular" (
http://books.google.com/books?id=s3ACB79MSdAC&pg=PA30)
WikiParker (
talk) 01:23, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
At the start of the seige, did the British seize any American-owned ships used later in the evacuation? Presumably not before then, but maybe after, just before the evacuation? Were the owners compensated or promised compensation for any ships seized? Guessing that they would have paid for at least some of any ships seized, as many must have belonged to overt Loyalists.
Did the British leave any or many ships to their owners upon evacuation? Presumably they would seize or scuttle any ships that could be converted to war use. Would there have been compensation for those?
What maritime commerce (either inter-colonial or international) was possible for Boston after the seige? It sounds like they had safe commerce with other places along the New England coast. Is that right? Wondering how things worked for Boston after the seige and how hard the recovery was.
Not looking for in-depth answers---just the basic facts in a handful of sentences. Thanks. CountMacula ( talk) 07:37, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
[copied from https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User_talk:Rjensen&action=edit§ion=42 ] The British were never "defeated" at the Siege of Boston. There were no battles; the total number of casualties that occurred after the Americans brought in the guns from Ticonderoga were a handful. Your statement that the British were "defeated" at the Siege of Boston doesn't even conform to the evaluation of the Siege in the Wikipedia article on that subject!
Even in Boston itself the annual celebration of the raising of the Siege of Boston is not called "Victory Day": it's called "Evacuation Day". When the British made the strategic choice to "evacuate" Boston they had that city entirely in their power, and Washington fully expected that they would burn the city before they left - there would have been absolutely nothing he and his army could have done to prevent them from doing so. So I don't see how anyone of sound mind can call this a "defeat" of the British! Sieges are an expensive military operation that often cause more casualties to the besiegers than to the besieged. Even though the American artillery on Dorchester Heights was unable to sink a single British ship in Boston Harbor, the British commanders decided that it would be far wiser to move to the pro-British city of New York and wide-open New York Harbor where their ships could maneuver much easier than in the treacherous island-and-shoal-ridden Boston Harbor. By doing so they effectively cut much more radical New England off from the rest of the rebellious colonies. By moving their naval operations north to Nova Scotia they could allow the sailors to disembark in a non-hostile area for training and relaxation while at the same time reducing the length and increasing the security of their supply lines. It was a wise strategic retreat and nothing more.
It is said in another message here that you are a "professor of history". I don't suppose you are a professor of *military* history.
IWPCHI ( talk) 10:08, 18 October 2020 (UTC)IWPCHI
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 20 January 2022 and 4 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Gcocucci2 ( article contribs).
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change "2nd Brigade, commanded by Brigadier General Jones" to "2nd Brigade, commanded by Brigadier General James Robertson" Change "4th Brigade, commanded by Brigadier General James Robertson" to "4th Brigade, commanded by Brigadier General Valentine Jones" Change "3rd Brigade, commanded by Brigadier General Paget" to "3rd Brigade, commanded by Brigadier General Sir Robert Pigot" Change "Commander of Artillery & Engineers, Colonel Cleveland (commanding officer of the 4th Battalion)" to "Royal Arillery and Engineers, Colonel Samuel Cleaveland" Remove "33rd Regiment of Foot" Remove "53rd Regiment of Foot" ColtF33 ( talk) 15:19, 24 March 2023 (UTC)