Talk:First Schleswig War

Untitled
do we still need the wikify tag here?
 * no --Heiko A 10:55, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

POV descriptions
The descriptions of the battles are directly taken from this external link. Aside from being copyrighted text, the phrasing used is from a Danish POV. It does not properly reference its data and does not provide information on what makes a battle an "easy Danish victory" or what makes a Danish retreat "masterly". Because of this, the text describing the battles should be removed or reworded into neutral and (ideally) referenced phrasing. Olessi 23:15, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Title
Any objections to renaming the page to First Schleswig War? That phrasing is used by more recently published texts than "First War of Schleswig". Olessi 19:41, 1 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Move completed. Olessi 16:00, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Belligerents corrected
I have removed sweden/norway from the list of belligerents, where it was incorrectly listed. Sweden/norway was listed as belligerent on denmarks side (as volunteers) This state did not participate in the war. Some volunteers joined on on the danish side though, but this is mentioned in the article.

I have never seen volunteers by country listed as belligerent before. And if they where to be, then the volunteers from the german states should be listed too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.82.220.50 (talk) 15:04, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Error in Background
The background section incorrectly states "When King Christian VIII of Denmark died without children in January 1848, the duchies could have gone under the rule of the House of Oldenburg, which may have resulted in a division of Denmark." Christian VIII had a son Frederick VII who suceeded him as King of Denmark. See here for an external reference. It was Frederick's death in November 1863 without children that led to the Second Schleswig War, not Christian's death in 1848. I'm deleting the incorrect sentence.--Eujin16 (talk) 19:21, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

"The duchies could have gone under the rule of the House of Oldenburg" - Clarify, please
In the Background section, "the duchies could have gone under the rule of the House of Oldenburg" is utterly unclear, at least to me, even after I've looked up the House of Oldenberg and twice tried to clarify it myself. First I assumed it meant "would have gone under the rule of a North German House called the House of Oldenburg", until I realized this was the Danish Royal House and thought that it was somebody with a poor command of English who was trying to say "would have ceased to be under the rule of the House of Oldenburg (the Danish Royal House)". Then I realized there were non-Danish branches of the House and changed it to "would have gone under the rule of some non-Danish branch of the House of Oldenburg (which is also the Danish Royal House)", before realizing this was really just a possibly mistaken guess by me, and self-reverting and adding a clarification request. So could somebody who understands what it really means please re-word it more clearly. Tlhslobus (talk) 23:48, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Further clarifications, please

 * April 3 (1849)" ... Prussia...determined to take matters into her own hands." : What exactly does this mean, and what has it got to do with the specifc date (April 3, 1849)?


 * At least one of the following 3 statements must seemingly be wrong, or at least misleading. I will put a clarify request after the 3rd of them, but it might be one of the others which is wrong. Please clarify which one(s):
 * on 26 August (1848), Prussia signed a convention at Malmö which yielded to practically all the Danish demands.
 * 31 May (1849): Danes stop Prussian advance through Jutland in cavalry battle at Vejlby.
 * In April 1850, Prussia, which had pulled out of the war after the treaty of Malmö,

Tlhslobus (talk) 00:49, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Tlhslobus (talk) 01:23, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Diet of the German Confederation: Because of the language used, I've Wikilinked this to the (then largely inactive) Federal Convention (German Confederation) rather than to the (active) Frankfurt Parliament. However it is unclear to me (and very far from self-evident) which one Wrangel actually said and/or actually meant (or whether he was being deliberately ambiguous), which presumably depended on his precise intentions (declaring himself subordinate to a 'legitimate' but inactive body is presumably convenient for a general who is behaving like someone who wants to be his own boss and is busily justifying his refusal to obey his own King). So I've also added a clarification request.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on First Schleswig War. 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/20080508063812/http://www.milhist.dk/trearskrigen/bov/bov.html to http://www.milhist.dk/trearskrigen/bov/bov.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121002054320/http://www.ohio.edu/chastain/rz/sleswig.htm to http://www.ohio.edu/chastain/rz/sleswig.htm

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) 14:08, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Schleswig - German confederation
The list of belligerents make i look like Schleswig was a member of the German Confederation when it was not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.233.104.136 (talk) 10:09, 13 January 2022 (UTC)