22nd Massachusetts Infantry Regiment is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on September 28, 2011.
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
The introduction states that only 125 "returned" of the 1,100 men who were in the regiment when it was mustered. This gives the impression that none of the others returned, which I doubt is true. While only 125 were still on active duty when the regiment was mustered out, I am certain that many of the others were discharged as wounded, sick, or otherwise unavailable for duty (deserted, promoted up and out (perhaps to U.S. Colored Troops), etc.). The introduction should be changed to reflect this. Thomas R. Fasulo (talk) 00:05, 3 April 2010 (UTC)Reply
Good point. I've added information on casualties according to the regimental history. Historical Perspective (talk) 04:52, 3 April 2010 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I suggest that Col. Grove's image be moved to be near either the text relating his taking command of the regiment or the text relating his death. This is where readers would have an interest in seeing his image. It is now positioned much further down the page. Thomas R. Fasulo (talk) 00:13, 3 April 2010 (UTC)Reply
I had considered this but was worried about crowding too many images near the beginning of the article. However, I think I've managed to put him in a place where he fits at the start of the Peninsular Campaign section. This places him in the appropriate chronological position, which I agree is important. Thanks. Historical Perspective (talk) 05:01, 3 April 2010 (UTC)Reply
