Talk:Battle of Ridgefield
Page contents not supported in other languages.
 | Battle of Ridgefield was one of theWarfare good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet thegood article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can berenominated. Editors may also seek areassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
 | This article is ratedB-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored,unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see"using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or"donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
Forlegal reasons, we cannot acceptcopyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source ofinformation, and, if allowed underfair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks andreferenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, provided it does not infringe on the copyright of the originalorplagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see ourguideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violationsvery seriously, and persistent violatorswill beblocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.SandyGeorgia (Talk)22:07, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link onBattle of Ridgefield. Please take a moment to reviewmy edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visitthis simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set thechecked parameter below totrue orfailed to let others know (documentation at{{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018.After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored byInternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other thanregular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editorshave permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see theRfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template{{source check}}(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot(Report bug)20:31, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links onBattle of Ridgefield. Please take a moment to reviewmy edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visitthis 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.
This message was posted before February 2018.After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored byInternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other thanregular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editorshave permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see theRfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template{{source check}}(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot(Report bug)05:21, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Several homes were looted and set on fire inWilton too, Why is this not mentioned?-Kieran207 (talk)18:33, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Although Tryon's raid on Danbury and actions in Ridgefield were tactical British successes, the resistance by American forces and a consequent rise in American military enrollments in the area deterred the British from ever again attempting a landing by ship to attack inland colonial strongholds during the war.
Conclusion: 1. British victory. 2. Tactical, since its results were limited to the battle itself.Creuzbourg (talk)11:18, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning towards cut-and-paste copyvio rather than backwards copy, because in another article around the same era, the same editor clearly was cut-and-pasting:
The same editor has multiple large edits that also look to be cut-and-paste, but sources cited can't be found in archive.orgSandyGeorgia (Talk)03:13, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The History section begins by referencing "a British force under the command of the Royal Governor of the Province of New York, Major General William Tryon", but in the info box under Commanders and Leaders, the top general listed is a General "Carl Tyron", which I think is incorrect, since "William Tryon" was a real person. I don't feel comfortable fixing this; could someone else please do it? Thanks.76.236.220.28 (talk)19:07, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
.svg)
