Jump to content

Talk:Fenwick Williams

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

Untitled

[edit]

If he's listed as "Commander-in-Chief, North America, 1859", why is there no mention of that position in the article? User:Zoe|(talk) 22:20, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

POV

[edit]

he practically commanded the Turks during the heroic defence of Kars, repulsing several Russian attacks and severely defeating the Russian general... <a link to wrong Muraviov follows>

This is a fine example of how wikipedia articles should not be written. Williams was defeated at Kars and surrendered it due to his inexcusable mistakes. --Ghirla -трёп- 12:34, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Willams defeated every Russian assault and only surrendered when they had no food left and the relief column diverted.

I agree with the comment made by the anonymous user. Our project has no place both for stupid Russian nationalism and xenophobia; the Turkish garrison heroically repulsed all attacks during the siege and prefered to surrender only because of cholera, famine, lack of supplies and a terrible mistake of Omar Pasha. The garrison was doomed but resisted fiercely, ignoring these troubles. This is undoubtly an example of heroism which is, remember, not a Russian prerogative.Asharidu 18:56, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Our project" is seldom useful as anything other than a starting point and often imbued with nationalism, as long as it's British, Western, etc. A nuanced portrayal of Williams (from multiple perspectives and contemporary sources) is given in Candan Badem's 2010 book. 188.26.163.24 (talk) 15:43, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I do not mean to vandalize so I'm not editing the article but it's İstanbul not Constantinople. --88.242.156.97 (talk) 22:47, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Duplication of Content

[edit]

In the summary section of the page his accomplishments in the Crimean war are put in excessive detail, perhaps too much for the summary. Possibly more significantly, the entire second paragraph of the summary is word-for-word copied from the "Career" section. I suggest we should make the summary more brief by dropping details like meeting Alexander II and the length and casualties of the siege. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naval Bagel (talkcontribs) 18:21, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]