Jump to content

Talk:Cavalié Mercer

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 9, 2009WikiProject peer reviewReviewed

Page creation

[edit]

I was amazed to find that there was no Wilkipedia entry for Mercer or Mercer's Troop, and that Mercer listed 38 notable Mercers apparently considered more important than the one I regarded as the famous one. So I decided to create the page.

Problems: Much of the material is derived from Mercer's own Journal of the Waterloo Campaign, which may not be considered reliable, as it is potentialy self-serving and was not published until 1870. Much of the web material I have used appears to derive from the Journal. I have not so far found a copyright-free image either of Mercer himself or of Mercer's Troop in action. Cyclopaedic (talk) 02:25, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think I have probably now taken this page as far as I can.Cyclopaedic (talk) 00:15, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Exact dates of promotions

[edit]

We seem to have a disagreement over whether exact dates of promotions should be included. In my view they spoil the flow of the text and make it a recitation of dates rather than a narrative of the man's career. The edit summary says they are important, but why? Does it matter if he became a colonel on 2 April or 4 May? I actually wondered if we need all the intermediate ranks at all - showing the rate of progress in his career is important, but not necessarily every step. He is notable for Waterloo, and his later career is not the main thrust of the article. Cyclopaedic (talk) 23:49, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Every other article on British (and Commonwealth) military figures, including Featured Articles such as Brian Horrocks has gone with including the full date, which is why I included it in the first palce. Dates of rank are important when trying to understand the relationships (due to relative seniority) between different military figures. The Times article I found gave full dates for all except his very early promotions. Actually that reminds me of something, that states he wasn't commissioned until December 1799, contradicting what we currently have here, and making his Irish service seem doubtful (though I think the process of rounding everyone up took some time). David Underdown (talk) 09:41, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it would matter in a long article about the life of a major figure who had lots of activity to relate between promotions, and it would be interesting to see whehter he was promoted before or after a particular battle, say. But in this case his later career is largely an afterthought and little documented, so I feel the dates make it look as if the exact dates are regarded as more important than the events.
There is more to come on the battle of Waterloo, but I thought I shouldn't write any more based on secondary sources until I have read his Journal. I'll look out for his commissioning date. Cyclopaedic (talk) 20:55, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Subaltern

[edit]

I don't believe Subaltern was a commissioned rank in 1800, probably should be ensign or cornet, etc. I'd be ok with 'a subaltern rank' but that sounds silly. I will see if I can find out. Kirk (talk) 14:09, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Subaltern isn't a rank, it's a description of any officer below the rank of Captain, so there was nothing wrong with it; but it's now changed to Lieutenant in the article. The Ordnance did not have Ensigns or Cornets; the rank of Second Lieutenant was not introduced until 1871. Hence the rank of Second Captain in the Ordnance. Cyclopaedic (talk) 16:41, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

move

[edit]

Cyclopaedic "moved Alexander Cavalié Mercer to Cavalié Mercer: Comply with WP naming convention"

Why did you move the article, as I could not find any mention of his man under either "Alexander Cavalié Mercer" or "Cavalié Mercer", with a Google book search, However

  • 301 on "Cavalie Mercer" -"Alexander Cavalie Mercer"
  • 68 on "Alexander Cavalie Mercer"

So the name should be move to "Cavalie Mercer" --PBS (talk) 13:06, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The most academic source we have in the article, the Canadian Dictionary of Biography does use the accented form. We British can be very sloppy about such things, I think it is now at the most appropriate location. David Underdown (talk) 13:48, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why is the Canadian Dictionary of Biography any more reliable than other sources reliable sources? We should use what is commonly used in reliable sources, not what is used in one specific source. --PBS (talk) 14:53, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well there are plenty of other sources that use the accented form viz http://books.google.co.uk/books?q=Journal+of+the+Waterloo+Campaign+kept+throughout+the+campaign+of+1815&btnG=Search+Books I don't think you can try and use a simple count for something like this, my google book search using the book title, rather than the author name does show the accented form turning up, it may be taht google standardises on the unaccented form, otherwise searchign can become quite difficult. Accents often get mangled online (there are some examples in the search results linked to here), the RHA history linked to in the article ends up with an e-umlaut, instead of an e-acute. I'll check Holmes later on as well, as he's more likely to have made the effort to get it right. None of the google book views seem to show his original printing unfortunately, as that might provide evidence of his own preferred form of the name. I think the general recommendation in MOS is that we should use the accented form, provided there's a redirect from the unaccented form, which there is. David Underdown (talk) 15:15, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am the principal author of the article. I know of no authoritative source that spells the name without the accent. His own book has the acute accent, as do Holmes and Barbero. The Library of Congress cataloging information in his book lists him as Mercer, Cavalié. The move was just to lose the "Alexander" in the title, as I realised he should be under the generally used name and not his full name. I did however also create a redirect from Cavalie Mercer for those like me (and Google) who can't remember how to get an accent on an English keyboard. Cyclopaedic (talk) 22:27, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Then if this is the most common name, it should be here. Besides, the accented version is the correct one. Also, on most standard keyboards, the "é" is produced by alt+0+2+3+3. :) --Patar knight - chat/contributions 22:35, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Google Books .. 117 on Cavalié -Cavalie Journal of the Waterloo Campaign kept throughout the campaign of 1815
  • Google Books .. 206 on -Cavalié Cavalie Journal of the Waterloo Campaign kept throughout the campaign of 1815.
--PBS (talk) 12:00, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Book of his art

[edit]

Whilst it is good to see Mercer and his work recognised in print, the paragraph "In 2014, Glenn Devanney of Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, penned a remarkable hardcover titled "Halifax in Watercolour: The Paintings of Alexander Cavalié Mercer 1838-1842." The ninety-six page book includes historical text and fifty-two paintings. Visit Devanney's website at gdevanney.ca." seems promotional and not encyclopaedic, and the paragraph is about the book, not about Mercer. Suggest removing the paragraph but adding the book to References. Cyclopaedic (talk) 21:08, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Waterloo Medal

[edit]

There seems to be some doubt about whether Mercer actually received the Waterloo Medal. As I understand it he does not appear on the lists. The reason is unclear, but it is possibly due to an administrative technicality (he was moved from G to D Troop immediately after the battle; as a result he was struck off G's lists but not added to D's, so officially was not there). Alternatively he may have refused it out of bitterness over what he felt was a failure by the authorities to recognise the importance of his services.RoryKat (talk) 20:49, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Cavalié Mercer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:57, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cavalié_Mercer&oldid=1208518662"