Talk:Battles of Saratoga/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

I will be reviewing this article. MinisterForBadTimes (talk) 07:23, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, I have now completed my review. An excellent article, generally very easy to understand, on a very important battle(s). There were a couple of statements I think need citations, which I've tagged appropriately. Other than that, there are some sentences I think need some alterations or clarification (listed below)

Whilst I accept the decision to describe much of the military aftermath of the battles in the article Saratoga campaign, I do feel that the rather brief description in the section 'Aftermath' could be extended. I also feel that there should be some kind of assessment of how important this battle was in the War of Independence. Fair enough it brought the French in on the US side, but how important was that? As a Limey, I've always been given the impression that Saratoga was a major turning point in the war - if this is true, then the article should say it! And so on.

Other than that, it all looks very good. I'll pass the article once the following are dealt with, but well done! MinisterForBadTimes (talk) 21:04, 15 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Both battles were fought on the same ground nine miles (14.5 km) south of Saratoga, New York, and were separated??? by almost daily skirmishes. Burgoyne, whose campaign to divide?? the colonies had started well but slowed due to logistical problems, won a small tactical victory over General Horatio Gates and the Continental Army in the September 19 Battle of Freeman's Farm at the cost of significant casualties.
 * Separated isn't the right word here. Also, should maybe mention the number of days between the battles. How was his campaign aiming to divide the colonies? Politically? Geograpically? Clarified


 * Burgoyne was forced to retreat, but his army was surrounded by the much larger American force, and he was forced to surrender on October 17.
 * Where was the army surrounded? Answered


 * British General Sir Henry Clinton, in an attempt to assist Burgoyne, captured American forts in the Hudson River highlands on October 6, but his efforts were too late to help Burgoyne.
 * In what way did he expect this action to help Burgoyne? By drawing off American forces? Clarified I hope.


 * In June 1777 British General John Burgoyne began an attempt to divide the rebellious United States in the American Revolutionary War by moving south from the British province of Quebec to gain control of the Hudson River valley.
 * Ditto - in what way was he seeking to divide the forces? Clarified


 * He therefore ordered Baron Riedesel, whose forces were in the rear of his army, to abandon outposts from Skenesboro south, and ordered the army to cross the river just north of Saratoga, which it did between September 13 and 15.
 * Which army crossed the river? Burgoyne's or Riedesel's? Or both? Clarified


 * While he and Gates had previously been on reasonably good terms in spite of their prickly egos, Arnold managed to turn Gates against him by taking on as staff officers friendly to Schuyler, a man Gates hated.
 * This is missing something!
 * Comment Well, I guess you have a point there. I'll need to dredge the sources out of the library to give the appropriate background.  (Summary: personality conflict)


 * (If Arnold had been on the field, these forces might have instead faced the larger danger posed by Riedesel's force.)
 * I don't really understand this? Where was Arnold, if not on the field?
 * Comment The brigade commanders in actions like this were generally not on the field; they were at HQ (presumably with a view of the field of battle) where they could coordinate with each other, rather than near the line (I believe this is the way Luzader explains it). (I think this is partly why Arnold's presence on the field in the second battle is somewhat unusual.)  I'll add more words about this.


 * Burgoyne, running low on men and food, was still in a very difficult position, but he decided to wait in the hope that Clinton would arrive to save his army.
 * Why was he in a difficult position? I know, but would the general reader?
 * Comment Because he's running low on men and food? He needs to reach secure winter quarters (mentioned in British Situation), and he knows he's outnumbered (not sure if I mentioned that along the way, it should be).


 * His leg wound left Arnold bedridden for five months.
 * The reference here needs to be simplified, and the book put in the bibliography (if not already). Fixed


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:


 * Thanks for your detailed comments. I will make adjustments over the next few days. (By the way, if you want to look at Saratoga campaign, it will eventually be heading for GAN as well.)  Magic ♪piano 14:01, 18 July 2009 (UTC)


 * A few comments interspersed above before I get going...  Magic ♪piano 00:03, 20 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I think I've answered all but the Schuyler-Gates thing (which will require a trip to the library). The reason this battle (or more accurately, the surrender ten days later) is a turning point is mainly because it brought France into the war (other important effects were destruction of the army and a morale boost after losing Philadelphia).  It sounds like you dismiss this in your comment above, but this fundamentally altered the game for you Limeys.  The British conducted almost no offense in North America beyond raiding (and the capture of Savannah) in 1778 and 1779 as they reallocated forces to the West Indies and withdrew from Philadelphia.  (I'm not sure why it took until 1780 to really get the "southern strategy" going; my knowledge of the British planning for that is limited.)


 * As regards the turning point issue, I'm happy you've answered that now. All I really wanted was a statement as to why the involvement of France was important (I wasn't dismissing it, though I can see why it might look that way; rhetoric doesn't work quite as well in plain text...), and you've answered that.


 * It may well be that the way the importance is communicated can use some work (both here and Saratoga campaign). I'll need to give it some more thought, though.  Magic ♪piano 23:38, 20 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, I'm now happy that you've covered everything I asked about apart from this sentence:

"by taking on as staff officers friendly to Schuyler, a man Gates hated."


 * I'm sorry that you ended up visiting the library over this, because the problem wasn't with the content of the sentence - it just doesn't make grammatrical sense. "by taking on a staff officer friendly to Schuyler"??? Or "by taking on as staff officers [words missing] friendly to Schuyler"????


 * The extra background on Schuyler and Gates is most welcome of course. But I should have been more clear what I meant! I will pass the article, assuming that you will fix this. Re the balance of between Saratoga Campaign and Battles of Saratoga, I am glad you will consider it, but I leave this up to your judgement. Well done! MinisterForBadTimes (talk) 13:55, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, I regularly go to libraries, so it's not a big deal. I now understand the ambiguity -- I parsed the sentence differently.  Thanks for the pass!  Magic ♪piano 14:54, 22 July 2009 (UTC)