Talk:Winfield Scott Hancock

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Hlj (talk | contribs) at 19:37, 19 August 2006 (expanded article on August 19). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconBiography: Military / Politics and Government B‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the military biography work group.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the politics and government work group.
Note icon
An appropriate infobox may need to be added to this article. Please refer to the list of biography infoboxes for further information.
WikiProject iconMilitary history: North America / United States Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis 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.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.
B checklist
Associated task forces:
Taskforce icon
North American military history task force
Taskforce icon
United States military history task force

He's always known as Winfield Scott Hancock, I don't think I've ever seen him called Winfield S. Hancock. He was named for Winfield Scott, and used the full name in recognition of that. -- Zoe

Yeah, although Winfield S. Hancock is used in many military works, because historians are like that. ugen64 01:57, Oct 30, 2003 (UTC)

expanded article on August 19

I have added a variety of improvements to the article, but wanted to explain one here. Although the recent addition of footnotes by another editor was a good thing, I think it is a better thing to use published secondary references in book form over online references, so I have replaced most of them. It was a little odd to see an article written from specific references footnoted from different sources, so now it is consistent. Hal Jespersen 19:37, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]