Talk:List of Continental Army units

Infobox?

I think it may make sense to create an infobox for each of the units that are listed here. I propose the following elements are included in the box:

• Name of unit
• aka name
• type of unit (infantry, cavalry, dragoon, artillery, etc.)
• authorized date
• department
• reorganized date(s)
• disbanded date
• battles

--Leifern 00:41, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes! I was thinking of doing the exact same thing for the British forces. Oh by the way, have you checked this link out [1]? It would be invaluable for transforming this list into a wiki(pretty)table. SoLando (Talk) 16:35, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

There was a suggestion of creating a general infobox for military units. It would have to include a "part of" element that could take into account a hierarchy. That is really useful information. Perhaps this list should be organized by the army years, e.g., Army of 1775, Army of 1776, Army of 1770-1780, etc. Then we can categorize the units by what army they belonged to. This is an arduous task, but we can take our time, I guess. --Leifern 16:39, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I have cleaned up the list a bit by removing duplications and taking out company names from units in the same regiment along with adding state names to those militia units I can identify. Marc29th 19:42, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Unit Bio's

I have started doing some short regimental bios so that there is at least some info about these units on wikipedia. Marc29th 22:46, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi all, I have reorganized the continental army part of the list by state with all the full time regiment for each state listed. there are many more short term regiments to be added but this will take some time to do. Marc29th 20:01, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Others working on this page please tell me if you like this new look and the shoet bio's I'm doing. I think that it is looks much better this way and easier to find units? let me know. Marc29th 20:05, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

I like it. I've also wondered whether it would make sense to organize it by which version(s) of the Continental Army they belonged to. That would require a fairly complex table structure, though. --Leifern 20:20, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Your right it would take a bit of work to come up with a table for the diffent years / units of the continenal army. I'll start think about it and will try to work on it after I get the unit bio's done in a few weeks.

Unit box ready for prime time

Please see Template:Infobox Military Unit and instructions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Unitbox for instructions and the associated talk page regarding how to deal with colors. --Leifern 21:08, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

14th Continental Regiment?

I've noticed that John Glover is mentioned as the commander for the 14th Contentintal Regiment, but I don't see the unit on this list. I'm reluctant to just assume it's a regiment we're not aware of - is it possible it's an aka of one of the other regiments?

---

It was a Mass. militia regiment that was brought into the Continental Army on in late 1775 and disbanded on Dec 31 1776. I just haven't yet put it onto this list yet. I was trying to get all the state units done before adding these units but I'll add it right away as this was an important unit. Marc29th 19:31, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I've added the extra Continental regiments that were not part of the Sate lines they were the 6th, 12, 13, 14, 21, 25 and 27 along with a bunch of short enlistment regiments from Mass and RI. I think we are getting close to a full list. Marc29th 00:52, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Also the Continental Regiment numbers are for the senority of the Colonel of the Regiment in 1776. Marc29th 00:55, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Clean out some small and duplicate units

Hi all, I have cleaned out a bunch of small and duplicate units from the militia sections. Also I have added a small section fro some French army units that served with the american forces.Marc29th 01:22, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Continental Army units things to do

Howdy. Over the last month or so I've reorganized the Continental Army list, as you may have noticed, using the by-establishment scheme suggested above. (Some work is still needed.) There are lots of things needed to be done with the individual unit articles. Here are some of them.

1. Add the Continental Army/state militia unit nav box, {{US Revolutionary units}}, to each unit article.
2. Widening scope of "state line" articles. There is already "state line" article for each state, e.g. Pennsylvania Line or New York Line, and even the Delaware Line (which had one unit!). For the present, I think these articles should all be renamed, and instead cover all of the troops from that state: Continentals, militia, and other state troops. Because many Continental units originated as state units, and many soldiers moved from state to Continental units and back again, etc., the troops from a state can be covered in a single article. So Pennsylvania Line, for example, should be moved to Pennsylvania troops in the Revolutionary War, or something like that, and list all Continental and state units on the page, with appropriate text. (Other name suggestions for the newly named pages are welcome.)
3. Using the campaignboxes in the unit articles doesn't really work. It clutters up the article with boxes, some of them altered from the original, when instead the "battles/war" field should be used in the Infobox Military Unit. Instead of listing every single battle, action, and skirmish in a series of boxes, these engagements should instead be covered in the article text, and just list the major battles and campaigns in the main Infobox Military Unit box.
4. Many of the existing units articles have basic style problems. I understand these are mostly stubs, but headers like "Summary" should be removed (in Wikipedia, the opening paragraph is by default a "summary"). Many of the articles have incorrect verb tenses ("the regiment would see action in..." should be "the regiment saw action in...."). Unfortunately these errors have been repeated in dozens of articles and need to be cleaned up.
5. Note that "militia", in most contexts, should not be capitalized. It's the Virginia militia, or the New York militia, not the Virginia Militia or New York Militia. Some older sources capitalize these, but most modern scholarly works appear not to. Some modern scholarly works don't even capitalize the "army" in Continental Army, i.e. they write "Continental army", but there seems to be less consensus about this.
6. Most articles about Continental units will use Robert Wright's book as a reference. This book has been listed in several different ways; we should standardize. I recommend copying-and-pasting the following entry:

• Wright, Robert K. The Continental Army. Washington, D.C.: Center of Military History, U.S. Army, 1983. Available, in part, online from the U.S. Army website.

Note that this entry should be placed under a section called "References", not "External links".

That should keep us busy for awhile. —Kevin Myers 01:17, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Continental Army units. 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/20151101171424/http://www.history.army.mil/reference/revbib/revwar.htm to http://www.history.army.mil/reference/revbib/revwar.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) 15:40, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Continental Army units. 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/20110218071530/http://etext.virginia.edu/washington/fitzpatrick/ to http://etext.virginia.edu/washington/fitzpatrick/

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) 23:40, 24 December 2017 (UTC)