Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Peer review/The Battle of Lake Erie (Put-in-Bay)

The Battle of Lake Erie (Put-in-Bay)
My merge request on this article has been reverted, so here am I. IMHO, it's the same as Battle of Lake Erie, albeit of much lower quality. Is there anyone who can see what can be included to Battle of Lake Erie before being sent to Afd? Thank you, Comte0 (talk) 23:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

TomStar81

 * I readded the tag, as it should not have been removed. I think the best course of action for you would be to create a user subpage and add the article there, then add the material you have that isn't in the real article there. By moving the material to a user subpage you can proceed at your leisure. Thats my two cents. TomStar81 (Talk) 06:40, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Rebel Redcoat

 * If you are merging I think you should be very careful. Much of this article is little more than patriotic bluster


 * Great Britain once again began to anger Americans with unjust policies
 * The British still had not recognized the United States as a formidable nation and disregarded them as fierce opponents
 * However, the Americans would prove themselves free and independent
 * It is remembered as a fantastic accomplishment by brave American boys yearning for adventure and excitement.

Other parts are historically dubious to say the least:


 * It marked the start of an age of naval superiority for the United States of America. What!


 * Wholly unacceptable. Rebel Redcoat (talk) 12:12, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Wholly unacceptable. Rebel Redcoat (talk) 12:12, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Addendum:
 * The battle put the British Royal Navy on their heels After the summer on 1813 the RN blockade was such that US ships could hardly venture out to sea, and had highly limited success.
 * Never before had a whole British fleet been defeated 'A British fleet'? A flotilla of ambiguously rated craft does not make a British fleet.

The faults of this article are too numerous. Rebel Redcoat (talk) 13:48, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm gonna have to agree strongly with RR. It doesn't even read like an article, but more like a textbook entry written by Joseph McCartney. I don't even want to cite examples; every paragraph is rift with patriotic language and disparaging of the British army. hbdragon88 (talk) 19:20, 8 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry, did I just write McCartney? I meant McCarthy.  Anyway, the point was that it sounded like patriotic drivel written by a red-blooded American.  I'm the first to admit that we got our collective butts kicked hard in the War of 1812. hbdragon88 (talk) 03:42, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I do fully agree with Rebel Redcoat too, the questionable quote about the start of an age of naval superiority for the United States of America was why I came here in the first place. Comte0 (talk) 21:26, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I say just change it to a redirect, no need to merge, I wouldn't be suprised if the content has been completely ripped from the sources (it reads just like a textbook does, as someone mentioned). It's well beyond saving and appears to be identical to The Battle of Lake Erie. Fin©™ 00:16, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Jappalang
As Comte0 has made it clear that he wanted to know if there is any information that can be merged into the proper article, I took a look through. I definitely agree that the whole article is biased and has a "point-of-view"-ish bent to it. Furthermore, most, if not all, of the information in this article is already in a summarized and neutral form in the proposed target of merge. With no references (and inline citations), it is difficult to verify each statement in this article as well (not withstanding the unreliability of it using Wikipedia as a source). As such, I recommend simply deleting this article. Jappalang (talk) 01:09, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Borg Sphere
I agree that this entire article needs to be deleted. It is not at all neutral, minimally cited, and the other article is about the same engagement. I was looking through it to find specific places to improve it, but it's all equally biased. Basically, the best thing to do at this point is to wait till its AFD is finished, right now that looks like it will be deleted, and then work on the other article. Borg Sphere (talk) 11:58, 28 July 2008 (UTC)