Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a25e1ab4eec2d96e

Jump to content

Talk:Capture of Gibraltar

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 6 years ago by Tupelo the typo fixer in topic question about the use of shells

Date inconsistency

[edit]

The infobox on Gibraltar states that the territory was captured by the British on 4 August 1704, instead of 3 August as this article states. Which one is correct? howcheng {chat} 08:43, 3 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

Mentioning the aftermath of the capture in the lede

[edit]

The lead does not mention either the sacking of Gibraltar that took place after the takeover (which resulted in a diminishing popular support for the Allied faction in Andalusia) or the fact that, as a key consequence of the capture, the Spanish population left the city forever (even though they might not know at the time that it would be permanent), which resulted in a mostly non-Spanish population (to this day). These facts are not good or bad: they are verifiad historical facts which most sources cite as very relevant in a pivotal turning point in the history of Gibraltar. These issues should not have been removed from the lead, don't you think? - Imalbornoz (talk) 13:56, 14 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

This is a classic example of Lede fixation by an editor with a bee in his bonnet. And I can already see you winding up to make personal accusations against other editors being somehow "embarrassed" by history. The information is in the article, it's been added in a manner reflecting WP:NPOV and I don't see it as belonging in the lede, which is supposed to summarise the main details in the article. Yes that should have been removed, no it shouldn't be re-added. You have no consensus to do so. WCMemail 14:39, 14 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

question about the use of shells

[edit]

"Tens of thousands of shells were fired in the attack."

Can this really be true? I know that shells existed before this time but don't believe they were very common in 1704, especially for use on Royal Navy warships. Even a hundred years after this time the Royal Navy was using primarily solid shot, with some use of chain, canister or grape shot. I don't believe even one shell was fired by Nelson's ships at Trafalgar in 1805. Tupelo the typo fixer (talk) 15:32, 12 June 2020 (UTC)Reply