Biased edit

This account is really biased in favour of the Canadian government. e.g. "A very dangerous situation developed when a group of Métis rushed the artillery. Only Howard's directing a heavy stream of Gatling fire at the attackers prevented a disaster." Would it not be disaster for the Metis to have a Gatling gun firing at them? This page needs to be rewritten to be more objective! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.64.105.79 (talk) 01:13, 25 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment edit

  This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 September 2019 and 6 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Keegantannahill.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 15:23, 16 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

United States Military Task-force edit

Shouldn't this article be classified under the Canadian Military History Task Force rather the American?

Wyldkat


- This account of the battle seems somewhat skewed towards the Point of View of the Canadian Army. Wikipedia is supposed to be an objective source. Considering the numerical and tactical inferiority of the Metis force (they had for the most part inferior firearms and were short on ammunition) the fact that they held off the Canadian forces for four days is laudable. Where is the tactical genius in the Canadian approach here? It seems sheer weight of numbers eventually won.

Assessment edit

This article was rated C class by an independent assessment (military) August 23, 2014. Comment by reviewer: "C-Class. Still has uncited paras, bit unsure about whether it properly covers the topic, but have given the benefit of the doubt, as it was already assessed as =y. Please bring it back when fully cited. Regards,"

Suggestions for improvement: references needed for every paragraph and further expansion of the page.-- Kayoty (talk) 18:55, 24 August 2014 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Battle of Batoche. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed 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 by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:23, 28 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Battle of Batoche. 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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:16, 16 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion edit

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:03, 3 November 2018 (UTC)Reply