Talk:Franklin–Nashville campaign

Expansion

I have started to reorganize and expand this article, using the more recent campaign style and providing footnotes. Currently all of the battle descriptions are essentially copied from the National Park Service American Battlefield Protection Program website, which is public domain. I will be re-writing all of these to remove the plagiarism and expand the content significantly, both here and in the individual battle articles. Hal Jespersen (talk) 20:06, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Franklin–Nashville Campaign. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141006163936/http://www.usma.edu/history/SitePages/American%20Civil%20War.aspx to http://www.usma.edu/history/SitePages/American%20Civil%20War.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050409012500/http://www.cr.nps.gov:80/hps/abpp/battles/bycampgn.htm to http://www.cr.nps.gov/hps/abpp/battles/bycampgn.htm#West64
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090226190851/http://www.johnbellhood.org:80/indefense.htm to http://www.johnbellhood.org/indefense.htm

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) 18:49, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history has an RFC

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Iseult ^Δx parlez moi 22:45, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history has an RFC

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Iseult ^Δx parlez moi 23:20, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

RFC on change from 12-hour clock time to 24-hour clock time

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

'consensus in favour of reverting the change' Timceharris (talk) 01:15, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

---

Should the change from 12-hour clock time to 24-hour clock time in this article be reverted? I will post my comments later. Donner60 (talk) 04:58, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

• Yes, as it is understood by far more readers, and 24-hour time has nothing to do with the subject, even in a broad categorical way; the US Navy adopted the 24-hour system in 1920, and the US Army in 1942. The 19th-century US military did not use it, and it really doesn't make any reader-facing sense here. Rather, it's kind of a WP:MILHIST editor-facing fetishism.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  06:57, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
• Yes, SMcCandlish's argument makes sense, although I'm open to changing my mind if the other side has some good points. Unfortunate that an RfC is needed for something this trivial. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 13:54, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

  I post the reasons below for this RfC. One of them is that it also has wider implications for possible changes in the clock time and use of preferable clock time in other history articles, especially military history articles. Donner60 (talk) 22:55, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

• Yes. It should be reverted to 12-hour clock time.”

Comment: Analysis. The first section of Wikipedia:Manual of Style Retaining existing styles, begins: “Sometimes the MoS provides more than one acceptable style or gives no specific guidance. The Arbitration Committee has expressed the principle that "When either of two styles is acceptable it is inappropriate for a Wikipedia editor to change from one style to another unless there is some substantial reason for the change.'” No substantial reason has been given or exists for the change and other considerations militate against it.

As stated in the article Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#Times of day, “Context determines whether the 12- or 24-hour clock is used.” Not only does this not overrule the Arbitration Committee principle, “context” does not support the change.

The 24-hour clock time is of recent origin. It is also not in common usage in the United States or other English-speaking countries except in technical or military operations contexts. The article 12-hour clock includes: “The 12-hour time convention is common in several English-speaking nations and former British colonies, as well as a few other countries.” and “In several countries the 12-hour clock is the dominant written and spoken system of time, predominantly in nations that were part of the former British Empire, for example, the United Kingdom, Republic of Ireland, the United States, Canada (excluding Quebec), Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh, and others follow this convention as well, such as Mexico and the former American colony of the Philippines.”

The military, journalists, historians and indeed all people at the time of the American Civil War used 12-hour clock time and used it when referring to any clock time.

Not only contemporary historians, but modern historians, use the clock time of the era about which they are writing in general and about the American Civil War and the subject of this article in particular.

The above comments also show that there is a strong national tie to the topic of American military history articles in general and American Civil War articles in particular.

While numerous examples could be cited for historians use of 12-hour clock time in American military history articles in particular, these specific examples on the subject of this article should suffice: In Jacobson, Eric A., and Richard A. Rupp. For Cause & for Country: A Study of the Affair at Spring Hill and the Battle of Franklin. Second Edition, the authors use 12-hour time e.g. p. 99: "around 2 p.m., p. 274: "about 1:30 p.m.", p. 448: "7 p.m. attacks". (The authors use the same abbreviations for rank used originally in the article under discussion in the next RfC which conform to the MOS.) In the pages on the Battle of Franklin in Eicher, David J. The Longest Night: A Military History of the Civil War. p. 773 map: "Franklin, Tennessee, November 30, 1864, 3:30 p.m., p 774: "By 9:00 p.m.". In Knight, James R. Hood's Tennessee Campaign: The Desperate Venture of a Desperate Man p. 66: "at 4:30 p.m.", p. 133: "at about 2:30 p.m." In McDonough, James L., and Thomas L. Connelly. Five Tragic Hours: The Battle of Franklin. p. 90: "Then by 3 p.m.", p. 126: "From dusk until about 9 o'clock that night". (Also some rank abbreviations as in MOS.) Gillum, Jamie. Twenty-five Hours to Tragedy: The Battle of Spring Hill and Operations on November 29, 1864 Precursor to the Battle of Franklin. p. 101: "1:00 P.M.", p. 270: "4:45 P.M." In Horn, Stanley F. The Decisive Battle of Nashville p. 105: "until 5:00 p.m." p. 127: "'About 4 p.m.,' Bates continues". There are a.m. and other p.m. examplesin these books. The point here is to give examples of historians' use of the 12-hour clock, which are best shown by p.m. examples.

Since most readers will be using 12-hour clock time, it will be inconvenient at least to have to deal with the conversion to the clock time they are accustomed to. In addition, as the preceding section shows, they will not find the 24-hour clock time in the references if they wish to check them.

If this change stands, there would seem to be no stopping wholesale changes to American military history articles, and even those of other English-speakling countries, even when before the adoption of 24-hour notation, not backed up by the sources, not in common usage in those countries except perhaps for modern technical and military personnel usages and not used by the original or, in the case of stubs, the first primary contributor to the article.

Comment:Background of submission. This question was raised by another user on the talk page of the user who made the change in this article to 24- hour clock time. In the absence of agreement, the users agreed to submit this and another question to RfCs at the military history project. The user who initiated the discussion on the talk page posted the two questions. The consensus on the first question (change in rank (grade) abbreviations from MOS style to NATO style abbreviations) appears to be clearly that such changes should not be made. With respect to the change to 24-hour time, objections were raised that the military history project was the wrong venue for the question. Since discussion has stopped and I posted the longest comment, I am moving the question to this page. I think the users should be commended for a civil discussion and for seeking a resolution without edit warring.

Comment: Implications. Although the question here is made specific to this article, it has wider implications. The guidelines so far as I discovered and can be reasonably interpreted provide answers to the question here and to most history article in general.

I have read recent RfCs about clock times which may have resolved specific questions but did not result in definite guidance in all situations or more specific guidelines. I hope that this RfC will show how the question should be addressed in this article, similar military history articles and new articles depending on the context without the need to post another general RfC on the more general topic.

Comment: Conclusion. The above comments show that 12-hour clock time should be used in this article and the changes should be reverted. Retaining existing (which is to say the original or primary (in the case of stubs) contributor's style, should be decisive here. The discussion in these comments gives other reasons and references for guidance for using 12-hour clock time in military history articles. Donner60 (talk) 22:50, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

• Yes, per my comments in the linked RfC which I initiated. I don't have any further comment except to express my preference against 24-hour military time as a general rule here. Iseult ^Δx parlez moi 07:38, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
• Yes. (Summoned by bot.) I find Donner60's analysis persuasive. And in any event WP:STYLEVAR should carry the day here, and the established in-article norm of 12-hour time should not be disturbed. -- Visviva (talk) 23:48, 27 August 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.