User talk:CWenger/Archives/2024/January

Latest comment: 11 months ago by Minturn in topic Antietam casualties


Antietam casualties

Hi, CWenger, This is about my noting the ambiguity in the Battle of Antietam casualty count. I run into this issue frequently when discussing casualty counts with people who are not U.S. Civil War history types. USCWHT's like to include both sides in casualty counts, but only for this war. Others, especially Europeans, are flabbergasted that this happens, particularly when comparing casualty counts from battles in different wars (e.g., Ken Burns' comparing Shiloh with Waterloo). I have found that you have to be REALLY clear--almost painfully obvious--or they don't get it. That's why I made the edit I did. Minturn (talk) 18:54, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

@Minturn: Thanks for the message. It already says "a combined tally of 22,727 dead, wounded, or missing", so I'm not sure what else "combined" would mean, unless it means dead + wounded + missing, but that's implied because it's only a single number. Maybe you can rewrite it to be more clear without the parenthetical? CWenger (^@) 19:28, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Dead + wounded + missing was just what I thought "combined" could be taken to mean. I'll cogitate on a clearer way to put it. Minturn (talk) 19:42, 17 January 2024 (UTC)