Talk:Battle of Prairie Grove/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Eddie891 (talk · contribs) 21:14, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

comments

• was ordered by Henry Halleck to send half of his force to Cape Girardeau, Missouri why?
  • Added that it was for transfer to Tennessee, a routine shifting of forces between departments.
• Following Pea Ridge, Curtis drove further into Arkansas, but was ordered by Henry Halleck to send half of his force to Cape Girardeau, Missouri. Curtis complied, but was forced to abandon his plan to attack Memphis, Tennessee perhaps this could better be phrased as "Following Pea Ridge, Curtis drove further into Arkansas and planned to attack Memphis, Tennessee, but was ordered by Henry Halleck to send half of his force to Cape Girardeau. Curtis complied and was forced to abandon his plan, instead heading towards Little Rock, Arkansas.
  • Done
• Curtis later formed the Army of the Frontier, and appointed Schofield to command the new army when?
  • Date moved up to here
• However, Schofield would be forced to give up command of the army due to medical issues, and command passed to Brig. Gen. James G. Blunt. when, and what relevance does this have on the battle?
  • Schofield wasn't actually in command when the fighting started - Blunt was. A change in army command mid-campaign has ramifactions on the whole campaign. Blunt was able to command Herron around in ways he wouldn't be able to otherwise. I added the date, too.
• Holmes later tasked Hindman when?
  • Date added
• On October 12, 1862, this force was officially organized under the command of Schofield and named the Army of the Frontier. yet you mention the Army of the Frontier numerous times above as though it was already formed.
  • Moved stuff around. I moved the date up to the formation, as it didn't really belong in the organizational overview.
• four divisions: one of cavalry, one of infantry, and a mixed reserve division perhaps it is my poor math, but that's only three.
  • Fixed. Should have been two infantry
• The army's two divisions were commanded by Daniel M. Frost and Francis Shoup which two?
  • The two infantry. Corrected in the text
• Hindman, Frost, and Roane had seen action what about Marmaduke? Or Shoup?
  • Marmaduke and Shoup had not fought in the Mexican-American War, but the other three had. I've rephrased that section to make it clearer.
• If all went according to Hindman's plan, he would be able to assault Blunt's position from multiple angles a little vague; clarify how he would be able to assault from multiple angles.
  • Clarified
• Despite Holmes' objections, Hindman's troops moved out of their camps on December 3. why didn't Holmes just order Hindman not to fight?
  • Holmes was a very weak leader, and Hindman just kinda cowed him into allowing the movement. I've clarified this in the text

@Eddie891: - I've addressed all your points so far, thanks for starting this review. Anything else you see on this one? I might try to take this through the MILHIST A-class system. Hog Farm (talk) 22:51, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

• yeah there’s some more... I’ll try to get to it tonight or tomorrow. If you are looking to take it forward I’d recommend reducing the reliance on Shea and incorporating some other sources. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 23:12, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
• Later that morning, clarify what day this was
  • Clarified
• Maybe try to say "confederate" or "union" forces rather then names when it is not necessary to, because a ready may struggle to keep track of the names (ex: if you are talking about all the confederate artillery present at the battle, just say 'the confederate artillery...' rather than listing names. Of course, don't sacrifice accuracy for ease of reading... I'll leave specific instances up to you.
  • I tried this as much as possible. In some cases, I used Union or Confederate as an adjective when necessary. The difficulty with this one is that the Union army was separated for most of the battle/campaign, so the distinction between Blunt and Herron is important. The same thing applies for the maneuever section, where Marmaduke was isolated from the main Confederate force. Is this better?
• Huston threw some of his men into the fray. perhaps rephrase to something a little more encyclopedic (realistic: people don't literally throw other people into fights (often)), though nothing really fitting comes to mind immediately... Maybe along the lines of "deployed some of his men"
  • Went with deployed
• Meanwhile, the Union armies had been reinforced. by whom?
  • Added source of reinforcements
• Union forces suffered 1,251 casualties and Confederate forces 1,317 casualties as in deaths or casualties? If the latter, add how many deaths if known. If the former, add how many casualties
  • Added death toll
• The state park contains 306 acres (124 ha) of the battlefield. The Civil War Trust, a division of the American Battlefield Trust, and its partners have acquired and preserved 351 acres (142 ha) of the battlefield are these combined totals or separate?
  • Well, I'm embarrassed. I shouldn't have used a 20-year old book for the total figure - The Arkansas State Parks website gives a total of 900 acres as of now. The sources are unclear about if the 351 acres were part of this expansion or not. The modus operandi of the Civil War Trust is to purchase the land and give it to a government body when possible, but I can't confirm this occurred here. Probably best to leave the figures unguessed. [1] mentions the 300 preserved acres, but doesn't say directly they became part of the park.
• our article on Prairie Grove Battlefield State Park says the battle "secured northwestern Arkansas for the Union." is that true? If so, might be worth mentioning
  • Added and cited
• I'm fine with the prose now, and feel it's at GA level. If you want to take it further, I've found requesting a copyedit at WP:GOCE can be very helpful. I can't speak to the content other than to say that it seems reasonably comprehensive. I've checked references where I can, and they support the text that they should. For this GA, I'm assuming good faith on page numbers of offline sources because the online ones line up, so I see no issue with that. Be prepared to share scans of offline sources to reviewers upon request for a higher-level nom.

I think the reliance on Shea definitely toes the line on over-reliance on one source, but I see Kennedy has also been used, so will pass on sourcing as well, though you'd definitely need to incorporate more sources for something higher than a GA. I think a newer map would be preferable to the old one on the page, but images are fine as it stands. Nice work on this. Though I have some additional comments, there's nothing to hold up passing. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 12:00, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

@Eddie891: - Thanks for a thorough review. I'll need to make this one a long-term project then, as Shea's the only source I have access to that devotes more than three pages to the entire battle. I'll see what I can do with finding other sources. Thanks. Hog Farm (talk) 14:41, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Hog Farm, I have access to "Hindman's grand delusion" from the 'further reading' section and can e-mail it to you if you like. Just let me know if you need/want it... Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 14:51, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I also have a large stack of the Civil War Times I need to dig through sometime. Hog Farm (talk) 14:54, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Hog Farm, If you want me to be able to send it, you have to e-mail me first because Wikipedia doesn't let you send attachments to somebody who has never emailed you,. If you don't need it, that's fine too Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 15:09, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed