Talk:Charge of the Light Brigade/Archive 1

Protected
Of all the pages to be attacked by juveniles, I would have thought this was way down the list. After undoing more than a dozen vandalism edits within about 10 minutes, I protected it. - DavidWBrooks 19:46, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

wikisource
Excellent use of wikisource, moving the long quoted passages out of the article! Kudos to those who have mastered the art of inter-wiki-ing - DavidWBrooks 12:39, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Further reading vs references
References are a lot more important than further reading; if any of the books in the further reading section were used as sources for writing this article (or can verify the content in it), we ought to cite them as such, per WP:CITE. Johnleemk | Talk 12:32, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Information about the poem (The Charge of the Light Brigade)
I've moved the information about the poem 'The Charge of the Light Brigade' to its own page. I think that it is important enough to have a page on its own, the information about the poem doesn't really seem to flow with the military aspect as well. Anyhow, I'm going to work on formatting and expanding it, and moving the proper references over. I'll probably move The Charge of the Heavy Brigade eventually too. --Mathwizard1232 02:05, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Opaque text
I don't understand this bit:

"A piece of the poem was paraphrased, "The world wonders", in security padding from Admiral Chester Nimitz to Admiral William Halsey, Jr. at the Battle of Leyte Gulf, which occurred on the 90th anniversary of the Charge of the Light Brigade."

Could someone who understands it please clarify? --Slashme 08:41, 22 March 2006 (UTC)


 * See Padding (cryptography) for an explanation of security padding. It can also be used with reference to older encryption systems where a short message is easier to break so people would add any old nonsense to increase the length of the message. SteveCrook 14:21, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

OK, gotcha! I wasn't thinking cryptography. Will update the article.--Slashme 12:36, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Nicely put
I came across this recently:
 * "And yet it was all a stupid mistake, brought about by a toxic triumvirate of boneheaded aristocrats in command, the lords Raglan, Lucan and Cardigan, none of whom would be trusted to clean latrines in a modern army."
 * -- Mark Butler, in a critique of Terry Brighton's "Hell Riders: The Truth About the Charge of the Light Brigade", Weekend Australian, 12-13 February 2005

Just thought I'd share that with you. :--) JackofOz 09:06, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Very nice, and very true. That was back in the days when all you needed to get a comission in the army was to be rich - or have rich parents. Luckily things changed, possibly because of this action SteveCrook 13:31, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

As for nicely put, everything pales in comparison with "The reputation of the British cavalry was significantly enhanced as a result of the charge, though the same cannot be said for their commanders.". Keep this sentence, whatever else you may do to this article. This is the sort of sentence that becomes famous. -- (comment added by 83.227.104.198)


 * My contribution. ;-) -- ChrisO 17:29, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Monty Python-style animation?
From the article, on The Charge of the Light Brigade (1968 film) - "Introductory animations, based on the contemporary style adopted by the satirical Punch Magazine animated in the manner of Monty Python, were designed to acquaint American audiences with unfamiliar politics."

From Monty Python - "Monty Python's Flying Circus, a British television comedy sketch show that first aired on October 5, 1969."

If the film aired in 1968 and Monty Python didn't debut until 1969, it seems odd to me to describe animations from the film as "in the manner of Monty Python".

Am I being too picky here, or does anybody else feel this way? -- 201.78.233.162 01:16, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Change it. Give the proper credit to Richard Williams. He designed the poster for The Graduate. He went on to be the animation director on Who Framed Roger Rabbit. Calling it "in the manner of Monty Python" is just a lazy description assuming that that's the only example of that style of animation that most people would know. SteveCrook 01:59, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * It Terry Gilliam's animation style that appears in Python. And it was in Do Not Adjust Your Set before that. But it is still speculative to suggest any influence.Billlion 21:27, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Most courageous?
The summary at the top of the article ends with a symbol of warfare at both its most courageous and its most tragic. There is nothing in the article which establishes or discusses this statement. My personal reaction is that the charge is a better example of the results of proper training, discipline and unit cohesion than it is of courage. That's just my POV, however. The point is that the article is not properly sourced. It needs to refer to published reliable sources that support the statements in it. -- Donald Albury 13:34, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The discipline and training is what creates the courage; it allowed the men to overcome their - justifiable - fear. Nonetheless, you're probably right. The article could do with some more sources. --Scott Wilson 17:24, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Omission
In its current form the article has one significant omission; it does not explain for a non-military audience why the charge was futile. I am left with the impression of a brave but extremely dangerous cavalry action that inflicts significant losses against a superior force, rather than a pointless and uneconomical pinprick. In particular the article would benefit from an explanation of what eventually happened to the Russian positions - I assume, based on the information in Battle of Balaclava, that they remained in Russian hands forevermore. Something along the lines of "The Light Brigade inflicted N casualties on the enemy for a loss of N. With no further allied attacks the Russian forces were quickly reinforced, for no overall tactical gain to the allies. The Russian positions remained in Russian hands for the duration of the Battle of Balaclava and were never taken by the allied forces." -Ashley Pomeroy 16:02, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Although this is an excellent, well written and very interesting article for which I applaud the author, it does have a key weakness: it makes the Light Brigade's attack seem almost like an Allied tactical success, which it wasn't.


 * The Light Brigade accomplished nothing and lost much. The charge inflicted no serious casualties on the Russians, even though the Russians disgraced themselves in failing to repel the attack sooner and by neglecting to completely destroy the Light Brigade as it fled.


 * The attack didn't even amount to a pinprick on the Russians.


 * And I don't think that the French Chasseurs d'Afrique accomplished anything of note either. The retreating Light Brigade was saved from complete destruction only because of the ineptitude of the Russian commanders, who were slow in reacting to developments on the field.


 * The Russians succeeded in dragging away the Turkish artillery captured earlier in the battle. This was what the Light Brigade was supposed to prevent from happening.


 * To the author: please don't take my criticisms personally...on the whole, I think you've written a great article.

Kenmore 08:53, 8 December 2006 (UTC)kenmore

"C'est magnifique, mais ce n'est pas la guerre."
"...prompted the French Marshal Pierre Bosquet to state "C'est magnifique, mais ce n'est pas la guerre." ("It is magnificent, but it is not war.")"

Not a very good translation I think. Evidently it was war, Bosquet meant that that was not what war is about in general. Remember, in the nineteenth century the idealization of warfare was still very much alive. How about "That was excellent, but that's not what war is about."? At least as an alternative translation. Renke 22:04, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

The translation's perfectly accurate - that's pretty much what he said - although perhaps a little analysis of the metaphorical meaning along the lines you're suggesting wouldn't go amiss. --Scott Wilson 01:00, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Although any such analysis would be a personal interpretation of what you think he meant - unless you can find it in a citeable form -- SteveCrook 01:30, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Of course, of course. --Scott Wilson 18:53, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I've always interpreted the spirit of it to tie into the idealised view too, that was was one thing and that the Charge itself was more akin to a massacre or suicide run... On the subject of quotes, is Nolan's "There lies your target..." bit a fabrication as well, then? Interesting to learn, that :) Tom Prankerd 20:45, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Possible audiences
I have the feeling, after reading the article, that it should explain why the charge failed, how it failed, what happened as a result of the failed charge and the reasons behind the chage happening in the first place, in a language school students would understand. Perhaps less in a miliatary (excuse my poor spelling) style that few students would understand.

After all, even students in year 8 would be asked to research the Charge of the Light Brigade espically if they have been studying the poem. Akid 09:42, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Referenced in Ender's Game?
So I just reread Ender's Game and I see no references, explicit or implied, to the Charge of the Light Brigade in the book. If anything, Ender's Game is antithetical to it in a lot of ways (sacrifices only for great gains, competent leadership, etc.). So why is it in the "Fiction" section of "Representation in Media"? 68.73.167.232 03:21, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I find it interesting that two key players in this battle gave their names to garment terms we use to this day: the cardigan sweater and the raglan sleeve. Lord Cardigan had the sweaters custom made for him, and Lord Raglan, who had lost an arm at Waterloo, had the sleeves of his jackets modified to fit his altered anatomy. Maybe some readers of the article would find it interesting if this were included. Maybe not....Cd195 05:03, 26 September 2007 (UTC)