Talk:Battle of Rowlett's Station

Indecisive Result

Usually, the tactical victory in Civil War engagement is attributed to the part that holds the ground after the battle (Union in this case). Also, the Federals were successful in preventing Confederates to achieve their objective (seizing the bridge) and suffered lower casualties. Why considering this a draw instead of Union victory? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcampos69 (talk • contribs) 15:40, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Most of the ACW battle articles hew to the line drawn by the NPS for such things. In this case, our reference http://www.nps.gov/history/hps/abpp/battles/ky004.htm says 'indecisive' not once, but twice. If you can get a citation from a secondary source that disagrees with the NPS, we can adjust the article accordingly. Hal Jespersen 23:26, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, your point is supported by a very creditable source. From my point of view, that fully justifies to leave the article as it is. Thanks!Mcampos69 16:25, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

1st Arkansas Infantry

The 1st Arkansas Infantry Battalion in the Order of Battle section may be the 1st Arkansas Infantry Regiment, which was a Confederate regiment. Did a part of this regiment participate in the Battle? Please include inline citation to clarify. Rosalina523 (talk) 16:58, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

"Operations in Eastern Kentucky"

Can anyone explain why this is listed (via Template:Campaignbox Operations in Eastern Kentucky) as part of "Operations in Eastern Kentucky"? Rowlett and Munfordville are certainly not in Eastern Kentucky. I see that this was added to the infobox many years ago by User:Brian0918, and I will see if that user can provide an explanation. I suggest that unless someone can give a reasonable explanation, the infobox should be removed from this article, and vice versa. cmadler (talk) 01:32, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

This information was copied directly from the National Park Service's American Battlefield Protection Program. They have Rowlett's Station listed under the section "Operations in Eastern Kentucky" here: https://www.nps.gov/abpp/battles/bycampgn.htm BRIAN0918 15:07, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Battle of Rowlett's Station. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.geocities.com/ind32ndinfantry/bfrs.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.civilwarinteractive.com/ArticleWillich.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070407220352/http://www.civilwarnews.com/archive/articles/gemindiana_peake.htm to http://www.civilwarnews.com/archive/articles/gemindiana_peake.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.geocities.com/ind32ndinfantry/bfrs.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070407220352/http://www.civilwarnews.com/archive/articles/gemindiana_peake.htm to http://www.civilwarnews.com/archive/articles/gemindiana_peake.htm

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:36, 28 October 2016 (UTC)