Talk:Fort Sumter/Archive 1

Union flags
"The primary immediate cause of the war in the north was the firing on the flag at Fort Sumter which, due to patriotism and pride, demanded a response. " Revision as of 23:41, 23 October 2003 User:24.144.15.243 User talk:24.144.15.243 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AAmerican_Civil_War&diff=1614350&oldid=1613875 --Teofilo talk  12:15, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Edit edit edit
Near the end of the article, after the words "two 90-mm antiaircraft guns", the next two words are unreadable on my computer because the words "[edit] [edit] [edit]" are superimposed on top of them. The [edit] link that normally appears with each paragraph is missing on several paragraphs, and presumably all moved to the bottom. I don't know how to fix it, but it's probably caused by the images on the right. It may appear differently on your system because such problems depend on things like browser preferences. Art LaPella 04:49, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Please do not remove the first flag
Hello,

You wrote : « duplicative flag image with odd caption ». Actually, if you look carefully, you'll see that the design of each flag is different. One flag is large and has one design. The other one is small and has another design. As regards to the "odd caption" see the above comment. --Teofilo talk  12:51, 30 December 2005 (UTC)


 * OK, perhaps if the caption had been better it would have indicated which flag it was depicting and it would have been obvious that there was a difference. The caption that I described as odd was: "The primary immediate cause of the war was the firing on the Union Flag at Fort Sumter." First, it is quite arguable that firing on Fort Sumter was a primary cause of the war; I think President Lincoln's election and the secession of South Carolina had a lot to do with it as well. Second, they were firing at the garrison in the Fort, not literally at the flag. But I do not mean to argue about the specific historical points, I am merely suggesting that the caption was poorly selected and worded. Typically in Wikipedia, image captions are used to describe the picture. For example, a photograph of Lincoln might say "Portrait of Lincoln by Mathew Brady in 1863" and not something akin to "Lincoln's election in 1860 was a primary immediate cause of the war." I would offer to fix the caption for you, but I am unfamiliar with the specific details of the various flags you are presenting. Hal Jespersen 18:18, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Revision
Someone has deleted darn near the entire article and left just a small blurb. I have restored the page to one of its orginial views. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.112.205.43 (talk) 19:14, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Ruffin
Ken Burns' The Civil War is one source stating clearly that Ruffin was the one who did so, stating in turn that he "would be delighted to perform the service" of opening fire. --Chr.K. 12:00, 5 September 2007 (UTC) bEThany eLaIne ACoSta fROm hoUstone wAS heRe mA 5/22/06 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.53.197.240 (talk) 23:16, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

"retake"?
I am confused by the line "Union efforts to retake Charleston Harbor began on April 7, 1863". When had Union forces previously taken the harbor? Probably "retake" is a mistake but since I know nothing of the history, I thought I would ask. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.197.28.158 (talk) 12:48, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Better photo?
Does anyone have a better current photo of the fort? dm (talk) 16:53, 27 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I added one. Bubba73 (talk), 17:07, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

yes i think we need more photos.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcmadman1323 (talk • contribs) 01:00, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Contradictions
Assertions in this article contradict the Battle of Fort Sumter article - particularly regarding casualties. There are also more details in this article about the events just before the battle than there are in the battle article - --JimWae (talk) 07:30, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Edits
I've edited this page (parts of it, at least) to be in keeping with the information presented both by the guides at Fort Sumter and the museum at Fort Sumter, which I visited today. The changes were 33 hours to 34 hours of bombardment, and 27th shot to 47th shot which exploded. The guides also stated that there were only 85 men garissoned at Fort Moultrie which were moved to Fort Sumter, and that the additional men present were from the maintenance crew already at Sumter, however I didn't see this in the museum, so I haven't changed it. --Jporteous (talk) 00:30, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

I struck the reference to the "nearest city" from the text box. First, that seems like a pointless bit of information. Second, I think Ft. Sumter is technically closer to the Town of Mt. Pleasant than Charleston. Mt. Pleasant is on the north shore of Charleston Harbor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ProfReader (talk • contribs) 02:09, 20 May 2009 (UTC) Edw1956ger (talk) 23:24, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

April 15, 1861 Fort Sumner was evacuted with One(1) amd Three (3) Union Soldiers Killed and Wounded respectively. This is at least what Conkiln's Handy Manual(5'th Edition 1896) states. Is there another reference which I can use to prove this untrue? Thanks

XI-inch Dahlgren guns
Are the "XI-inch Dahlgren guns" 11-inch guns? If so, it would be good to state that. Bubba73 (talk), 14:59, 15 October 2009 (UTC)