Talk:Battle of Wilson's Creek

First Battle of Springfield???
According to this very informative page, the first battle of Springfield happened after Wilson's Creek, on Oct. 25 1861. Source. --brian0918 04:57, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Yep. That's the correct chronology. I think the reason for the seeming problem is due to the fact that at the time of the Battle of Wilson's Creek, the area of the battlefield was outside of Springfield. Springfield has since grown, and the area of Wilson's Creek has been incorporated later into the greater Springfield area, though it is technically in Republic, I think, which is something of a suburb of Springfield. --Steelviper 18:19, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Missourians, not Confederates
This article incorrectly refers to the Missourians as Confederates. Jackson's government did not secede from the Union until months after this battle, and did not join the Confederacy until 28 November 1861.--Plainsong 14:44, 30 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Well, they were not all Missourians, so that's not accurate either. Check out: http://ehistory.osu.edu/osu/books/battles/vol1/pageview.cfm?page=298.  It was definitely a Southern force.  Pearce even referred to that army, in Battles and Leaders, as a Confederate army.  I think it should "Missourians" needs to go, in most instances. Gibblet 00:59, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * The fact is that Missouri and Kentucky were pretty much divided down the middle. Both states had representatives in the United States Congress and  the Confederate Congress.  Some Missourian were Confederates and some Missourians were Union.  In the Battle of Wilson's Creek, the truth is that the Missouri Guard was a Confederate unit.  I am reseach to see if there were any Missouri units in Lyon's Army, but have found nothing concrete yet.  --(Steve 20:59, 27 April 2006 (UTC))

I learned in history class that The Battle of Wilson's Creek was the crucial battle that would determine whether Missouri was a Confederate or a Union State. My history teacher, as well as the historians at the battlefield, have stated that Missouri became a Union State after the Battle. Whoever wrote in the main article that Missouri was a Confederate State needs Gen. Lyon to tech him/her a thing or two.--SladeMcGowan 21:59, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

President Bush
This was because they feared that President Bush would cut funding for the war. Is this supposed to be Bush? I could understand Lincoln or Jackson, but Bush seems weird. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Buffalodan (talk • contribs) 19:41, 10 May 2007 (UTC).

Trans-Mississippi Theater
Being in Missouri, wasn't this battle in the Trans-Mississippi Theater, not the Western Theater? KevinLuna83 (talk) 13:55, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

"3rd Iowa" a longstanding error in article
There has been a recent set of reverts on this. This is a somewhat unusual example of anonymous IP editors identifying a longstanding error missed by experienced editors (myself included.) The corrections have been made from IP's in the Czech Republic. Thanks, for the catch, I'll tip a Czechvar (my favorite pilsner) in recognition. The unit should be the 1st Iowa, the 3rd Iowa was not present. Somehow, a surprisingly blatant error was introduced way back on March 5, 2011 by User: Wild Wolf and not noticed until the past few hours.

The 3rd Iowa also had gray uniforms at the Battle ofLiberty/Blue Mills Landing]] in its first combat in Sept. of 1861. This might have been the source of confusion. Red Harvest (talk) 10:26, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Opposing forces
I think the format I've deployed here is a little more easy to read than the old table format, plus the forces involved are so limited we can dispense with the separate OOB pages. Hungrydog55 (talk) 00:09, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Disagree. For length issues, I don't think it's feasible to include the order of battles here.  Those pages are usually split out for a reason.  Also, the OOBs will need citations. Hog Farm (talk) 01:04, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
 * , I agree. has also changed the format of numerous orders of battles to a version that I find far less comprehensible. I've left a message at his talk page urging him to find consensus if he has not already done so before making any further changes. Display name 99 (talk) 19:02, 12 April 2020 (UTC)