Talk:Archduke Charles, Duke of Teschen

Untitled
This article is missing its country. Per Naming conventions (names and titles) it needs to be included. See also Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria for further reference. Gryffindor 15:16, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Done. JenLouise 02:11, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

As of 18th of May 2004 the Archduke Charles page is not a balanced biography!

"Serving with distinction against Napoleon Bonaparte in 1796, Charles then beat lesser opponents such as General Jourdan and General Massena"

Massénamay have lost to Charles at The First Battle of Zurich 1799 but he beat him at the Battle of Caldiero October 1805. According to Rothenberg and my opinion, I believe this is a draw battle. Both sides claimed their victory and both got the similar numbers of casualties. So Massena actually did not beat Charles at Caldiero. Philip Baird Shearer 06:56, 18 May 2004 (UTC) I think that it meant that the Archduke had vanquished him for that time, Mr. Shearer. --Anglius 02:47, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

At the end of the campaign the archduke gave up all his military offices.
Is not Generalfeldmarschall a permanent ("life-long") rank? --Anglius 02:47, 27 July 2005 (UTC). He was "forced" to resign after the battle of Wagram by his brother (Emperor Francis) and the war faction who hated him (Metternich and the Hofkriegstrat). He also wanted to come back in the later stage but was ignored by the authorities. And he was a "Generalissimus" at the time he resignd, who held the most power (after the Emperor) of the army, not just a Feldmarschall.

Aspern-Essling
"the Archduke won the Battle of Aspern-Essling"...uh, no, he did not. You can clearly read on the article for that particular battle that the result was INCONCLUSIVE. The Austrians also lost a good many more men than the French - some other language used detracts from this article's objectivity. Leave out the editorializing! Well, Rothenberg mentions that the Archduke defeated Napoleon although it was a costly victory, so if your point is to argue that the Archduke did not win Aspern-Essling at all then I think you're wrong.

Monarchical Styles Infobox
This infobox, besides looking like a gaudy wine label, doesn't have any practical use in the biography. It's a bit silly (and not at all reverent) to address an Austrian archduke in English, especially when he has been in his tomb for a long time. I'm going to remove it, as (for instance) happened on the King Christian VIII of Denmark page. Glatisant (talk) 11:13, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Lack of neutrality
There is a lack of neutrality throughout this article. A few examples: The caution which the archduke preached so earnestly in his strategic works, he displayed in practice only when the situation seemed to demand it. Even more so: He was at the same time capable of forming and executing the most daring offensive strategy, and his tactical skill in the handling of troops, whether in wide turning movements, as at Würzburg and Zürich, or in masses, as at Aspern and Wagram, was certainly equal to that of any leader of his time, with only a few exceptions., and ''His campaign of 1796 is considered almost faultless. That he sustained defeat in 1809 was due in part to the great numerical superiority of the French and their allies(...)". --Lubiesque (talk) 18:59, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * This is the kind of writing typically found in Wikipedia articles when portions have been copied more or less verbatim from older texts, often the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica, from an era when it was common for historians, often experts in the field, to blend factual reporting with prevalent assessment. FactStraight (talk) 21:21, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Karl von Habsburg which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 17:47, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Election of a King of the Belgians (1831)
When the National Congress of Belgium voted for the first time on a King (3 february 1831), he got 35 votes in the first round and 21 in the second round.-- Bancki (talk) 06:48, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

"He was considered one of Napoleon's most formidable opponents"
Napoleon thought very little of Charles, and whilst Charles did battle him more than many others, he lost almost all of the time. 2A01:B340:86:17E3:2A4E:CA50:3308:5A89 (talk) 08:27, 10 July 2024 (UTC)