Talk:Corps of Colonial Marines

Test
test, to get a ToC box Keith H99 (talk) 11:56, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Typo?
Liberty afar of fight for the British". The Virginian Pilot: p. HR3. Art LaPella (talk) 22:16, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Colonial Marines in 1814
The organisation of the Corps in 1814 is ambiguous in some areas prior to 03 September 1814.

Nicholas advises that three companies of Colonial Marines were to join with three companies of Royal Marines, to form a reconstituted third battalion. Pay records, compiled by the paymaster of the Battalion have survived and can be viewed at The National Archives, Kew, Greater London, UK. The names and enlistment dates from the document ADM 96/341 have been transcribed, and are hosted on the web pages of The National Archives: [ http://yourarchives.nationalarchives.gov.uk/index.php?title=Corps_of_Colonial_Marines_muster_in_1814 ]

During the August 1814 actions of the Chesapeake campaign, the Royal Marines, for the most part, were in the Third Brigade. The exceptions, whom were in the First Brigade, were Lt John Lawrence's rocket detachment, Lt Athelstan Stevens's company, and a company of Colonial Marines. (This has been mentioned already on Talk:Battle_of_Bladensburg)

The strength of the Corps of Colonial Marines was 200 men. Gleig's eyewitness account mentions a company of about 100 men at Bladensburg.

If the Colonial Marines were in three companies prior to 03 September 1814, then the use of basic arithmetic tells us that if one company was at Bladensburg, then the remaining two companies must have been at Washington, where two fatalities were sufferred.

There was sufficient evidence that Lewis Agassiz took part in the burning of Washington, enough evidence to justify a coat of arms using a flaming torch. The big question is: when did he become a company commander with the Corps of Colonial Marines? Keith H99 (talk) 11:56, 1 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Cockburn's letter dated 17 July 1814 states ' I think we have about 120 Men in the Corps', which is in line with Gleig's eyewitness account mentioning a company of about 100 men. The presence of the British must have resulted in a steady increase of emancipated African Americans, and with it more recruits for the corps, with the result that in Autumn 1814 there are about 200 men on Tangier Island. The enlistment dates in 1814 are recorded on the transcribed muster sheets, and these have been in the public domain since 2012 Keith H99 (talk) 22:02, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

suggested improvements to make this Good Article class
I am clueless as to what further changes are needed to further raise the bar, and would therefore welcome responses as to what improvements could be made. I do think the quality of the article has improved over the past 12 months, in particular the structure. Keith H99 (talk) 20:28, 19 November 2012 (UTC)


 * >21 November 2012‎ Jim Sweeney (talk | contribs)‎ . . (19,363 bytes) (+63)‎ . . (tags added NOT ready fpr a GA review)
 * Hello,
 * I've been making edits to the aforementioned article for a while. The structure did need an overhaul, and there were number of citations which were needed. Given the number of changes which had taken place since the initial review, I made a request for a further review, as it seemed to comply with B Class.


 * On 19 November, I did set up a header in Talk:Corps_of_Colonial_Marines for suggested improvements, and this is barren. :On 21 November, I see you added a Lead tag, suggesting this be discussed on the talk page, and the comment "tags added NOT ready fpr a GA review".


 * Please can you give some further guidance. From what I can see, an intro of about 4 paragraphs is needed on the general subject of former slaves recruited during two time periods and in two geographic regions. Up to now, the focus has been on the two sub articles themselves. I am keen to elicit responses from several persons, with regard to where the existing article could be improved. I have no experience in this area. Thanks, Keith H99 (talk) 10:44, 1 December 2012 (UTC)


 * The lede section is very small it should summarize the article, covering the raising and disbandment of both corps and any battle etc they were involved in.
 * I would also combine the two info box's and move it to the top of the article see 15th (Imperial Service) Cavalry Brigade for example.
 * I would also consider combing the raising of the two corps into a combined section ==Formation== or similar and then the corps history ==History==
 * Every point needs an inline citation and if a paragraph ended uncited someone will question it. Your can expand citation to cover more than one point using WP:REFNAME if its a large block of text.
 * Citations should not be capitalised Heidler (2004), p188  not HEIDLER (2004), p188
 * Same with the references author names.
 * What make Linzey's dissertation a reliable source?
 * British and Foreign State Papers needs needs adding to the reference list and all references should follow the same style (see Heidler (2004), p188 above). They should all have ISBN's or OCLC numbers where available.
 * Latimer, Rodriguez, Nicolas and Marshall need year of publication added to inline citation (to remain consistent).
 * Ref #2 BUCKLEY(1998) needs a page number added.
 * What are TNA PRO ADM 1/329 and other similar numbers used for references is there a book or on line link available Jim Sweeney (talk) 13:45, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Some food for thought. Thanks Keith H99 (talk) 18:01, 1 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I presume you are a fairly new editor, so don't hesitate to ask questions, WP:MILHIST is a good wikiproject and someone will always respond to questions there. On another note you might want to consider removing the GA request and go for Peer review first. Jim Sweeney (talk) 18:26, 1 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the feedback. Yes, I am a new editor, hence The T J Linzy thesis, bears a reference pp23-34 to HMS Orpheus and the Creek Indians, which is an introduction to the Corps of Colonial Marines establishment at Prospect Bluff. Given that this was a postgrad publication, for whom her tutor was Professor Andrew Lambert, rather than an undergraduate dissertation, it seemed okay. Linzy's source is a letter within ADM 1/506 (and the same material appears in WO 1/141). Where the original source, citing a reference from The National Archives is used, it is deemed better to quote that rather than a book, as the ultimate source of information.


 * I do not understand the "citation needed" requirement which you have added with regard to geographial deployment on the Atlantic & Gulf coasts respectively. Were this an article about the BEF in 1914, I would not see a need to mention that the BEF saw combat in France and Belgium, given that subsequent chunks of the article should make it apparent (i.e. that Le Cateau is not in Togo and Antwerp is not in the midwest of the USA), and that the chunks themselves would contain a substantial number of citations to show that the BEF was at battles, and the locations of these battles are by definition in France and in Belgium.
 * Is this because it is at the end of a paragraph? Keith H99 (talk) 20:02, 1 December 2012 (UTC)


 * The message I am getting is 'The statement..needs a cite or rewrite'. In a nutshell, if there are subsequent citiation in the article which provide proof that the Corps were at various locations - on the Atlantic and Gulf coasts - why is a cite needed? I am trying to get a crystal-clear understanding of the reason why, and I am not grasping it. Regards Keith H99 (talk) 18:41, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
 * If a citation is before the statement that's fine but if the citation is later in the text then there is a problem as it needs to be cited at first mention. Using ref name is the best way of doing that. Jim Sweeney (talk) 18:45, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

To User talk: Acad Ronin Hello, I have noticed that you have contributed to the Corps of Colonial Marines article in the past. The introduction needs a re-write. Most of the details (corps were formed from former slaves aleit for different reasons, outline of each of the two Corps, legacy in Florida), but the style needs reworking. Would you be able to cast an eye over the introduction, and improve the flow, as it needs refining. Regards Keith H99 (talk) 22:44, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for having tidied up the introduction. I will be moving one paragraph, but that is the only change for now. Regards Keith H99 (talk) 07:37, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Corps of Colonial Marines. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304072817/http://www.jtfgtmo.southcom.mil/wire/pdf/v18/TheWire18-31.pdf to http://www.jtfgtmo.southcom.mil/wire/pdf/v18/TheWire18-31.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:02, 13 August 2017 (UTC)