Talk:John Pope (general)

Assessment
With the proper infobox this is a "B-Class" article.--Looper5920 07:08, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

ranks
A great number of the American Civil War biographies use the Eicher reference for basic military career progressions; it is based on a very exhaustive set of military sources. I have reverted some changes in a previous edit that used an antique Harper's Weekly reference. Although it may seem unlikely today, apparently West Point graduates at the time actually had brevet ranks as second lieutenants and were granted the full rank of second lieutenant only at a later date. And Pope's "promotions" for the two Mexican battles were both brevet ranks. Hal Jespersen 18:40, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I find that rather dubious, but I'll take your word for it and assume that you have examined the Eicher reference and that the article accurately reflects the source. I am restoring the link to what you call the "antique" Harpers. older ≠ wiser 01:24, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to seem pejorative, but anything over 100 years old is technically an antique (except for cars, where it's 50, I think). In any event, Harper's is a primary source, written in the style of the time, and can't be relied on for the specifics of ranks and other military details when compared against a secondary source (Eicher, Warner, etc.) that is based on a historian's evaluation of numerous primary sources, including the ORs and US Army personnel records. Hal Jespersen 15:59, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

There is little in this article about his personal life. Was he married? Children? etc.Trucker11 (talk) 19:14, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Promoted Major General Twice?
It says "and received a brevet promotion to major general in the regular army on March 13, 1865, for his service at Island No. 10." And further below: "John Pope was promoted to major general in 1882 and retired in 1886." 83.255.70.208 (talk) 23:19, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * You're right. The article on brevet ranks is linked twice in the article and may provide the explanation you seek. Hal Jespersen (talk) 01:35, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Walter Donald Kennedy
He is a neo-confederate and part of the lost cause school. See: Lost Cause of the Confederacy TeriEmbrey (talk) 17:35, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified one external link on John Pope (military officer). 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: When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060831071227/http://www.city-book.com/Overview/history/history3.htm to http://www.city-book.com/Overview/history/history3.htm

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:46, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

"Strategic Turning Movement" ?
I'm not sure I'd consider Jackson's movement "strategic". I think this was more at the operational level of war. 2600:1700:4940:5040:806C:F6A:AB26:26E0 (talk) 07:04, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

"Postbellum Years" Messy references
I am no expert on Pope, but it seems like the references in this section are off. For example, the statement describing Pope's efforts in the 1880s: author Walter Donald Kennedy notes that he also said "It is my purpose to utterly exterminate the Sioux" and planned to make a "final settlement with all these Indians" does not cite Kennedy; it cites the Official Records of the Civil War, which would not be relevant to this period. Kennedy does not appear in either the "references" or "further reading" section. I suspect there are similar errors in citations elsewhere in this section, and perhaps elsewhere in this entry.

These may be unintentional, and may not affect the accuracy of the entry, but it is sloppy work. Anyone care to track the actual sources and update the citations (and perhaps the entry) for accuracy? MsTheMug (talk) 16:58, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 14 May 2023

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved (non-admin closure) >>> Extorc . talk  10:10, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

John Pope (general officer) → John Pope (general) – Consistency with other article title. For example: William F. Howe (general) and so on. Footwiks (talk) 17:03, 14 May 2023 (UTC) The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Support per nomination. The one-word parenthetical qualifier "(general)" is in use throughout Wikipedia. The main title header had been moved only a week ago from the unnecessarily-extended "John Pope (military officer)" to the more-specific, but still extended "John Pope (general officer)". —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 19:11, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Support. This is a very obvious one. Standard disambiguator for American generals. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:37, 16 May 2023 (UTC)