Henry Clinton (British Army officer, born 1730) was a Warfare good articles nominee, but did not meet the
good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be
renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
This 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.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This 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.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
Both the
ODNB,
[1] and the Nottingham University webpage in external links give his year of birth as 1730, not 1738. The oDNB further states that his father obtained him a Lieutenant's commission in the New York militia in 1745 - even with his position as Governor, I think that a 7 year old is alittle young for that. Is there a source for the later date?
David Underdown (
talk)
15:26, 5 June 2008 (UTC)reply
I think it was possible to buy a commission for such a young boy in those days - he would not actually serve, but he would gain years of seniority.
DuncanHill (
talk)
01:32, 16 September 2008 (UTC)reply
You've made some progress during the past eight days, but there's still a lot to do to make this article into a GA-Class one. Here are some of my concerns:
The lead is still too short and doesn't summarise the article completely
A picture is still without a suitable caption
The Later Life section is still far too short and needs expansion
Legacy section stil only has one citation and needs one for each quotation
Still not enough citations in some sections, especially the latter part of Commander In Chief. See my previous comments for more details.
References either all need ISBN numbers or none should have them - several still have them.
References also need to be properly cited using the templates.
I think that's enough for now. There has been work done on the article, but I feel it may be better to fail the article and allow you to work on it, then re-nom it at a later time.
Skinny87 (
talk)
20:07, 23 June 2008 (UTC)reply
I suspect that Clinton was born in England - his father did not become Governor of Newfoundland until 1731 (the year after our subject's birth), and the ODNB article does not give a place of birth (the 1887 article gives Newfoundland, but this has him born about 1738).
DuncanHill (
talk)
01:50, 16 September 2008 (UTC)Bold textreply
I really think this would benefit from a good copyedit, as a lot of the writing is stilted or doesn't make grammatical sense. A few of the things I've come across:
Clinton was born in Newfoundland, then a British colony over which his father, George Clinton, was governor - Of which, surely? FIXED
In 1751, the young Henry went to England - why 'the young' in here? FIXED
He was at first commissioned as a Captain - Again, no need for 'at first', it just sounds awkward. FIXED
The lead is also far too short. It should summarise the article and be at least two paragraphs, not a few sentences.
1.2 Manual of Style
I have several issues about the article for this section:
The links to external websites in the citations should be formatted (use of {{citeweb}} template is recommended, though not required) to include access dates. Note this will not fail a GA Review, but is extremely helpful. UNABLE TO FIX (Did not add EL sources)
All of the references are not cited properly using the correct citation templates, which is a major issue. (References are now properly cited)
References using the same page numbers of the same book need to be combined together. (It is not apparent as to which page they are referring to)
Regarding layout, the accepted format is for "See also" to come before the Notes and Refs sections (per
WP:LAYOUT), and headings should normally be singular (per
WP:MOSHEAD), so "Evaluations" should be "Evaluation" (although to be honest a more appropriate title could be found - 'Evaluation' sounds rather like
WP:OR. Maybe 'Legacy' or 'Aftermath'?) FIXED
Far too few citations for a GA article in my opinion. Some sections only have one or two per large paragraph, which I don't believe to be enough. (Only contentious material must be cited. Some of the cites are most likely for whole paragraphs)
There is practically nothing on Clinton's later life, and having done several university courses on the American War of Revolution know that there was a great deal he did in his later career. That section also has no references and requires them. (Was unable to locate any further information on his post ARW career)
His early career also has very few citations, and more are needed.
Specific sentences requiring citation include the following ones below. Citations for quotes are mandatory at GA level.
The sentence "Late during the Seven Years' War, Clinton distinguished himself (1760–1762) as an aide-de-camp to Duke Ferdinand of Brunswick, and he was promoted to full Colonel in 1762." says he 'distinguished himself'. Unless this is backed up with a cite, it comes over as editor opinion.
Also, "...Clinton strongly advocated that British forces secure them against rebel occupation, but his warnings went unheeded by Howe." Who says Howe ignored Clinton, and where do they say it?
He was, wrote Major Wemyss who served under him, "an honourable and respectable officer of the German school; having served under Prince Ferdinand of Prussia and the Duke of Brunswick. Vain, open to flattery; and from a great aversion to all business not military, too often misled by aides de camp and favourites."
The Colonel Charles Stuart vitriolically called him "fool enough to command an army when he is incapable of commanding a troop of horse."
In 1782, Clinton was replaced as Commander-in-Chief by Sir Guy Carleton, and he returned to England. His replacement is linked to the fate of the southern army, which was surrounded and forced to surrender by George Washington and the Comte de Rochambeau, who commanded a combined French-American Army after the Siege of Yorktown. - Seems like
WP:OR without at least one citation and a rewrite.
By late in 1779, having called in the troops from Newport to do so, Clinton had assembled a strong force for the next step in this strategy, an invasion of South Carolina. Clinton took personal command of this campaign, and the task force with 14,000 men sailed south from New York at the end of the year. By early 1780, Clinton had brought Charleston under siege. In May, working together with Admiral Mariot Arbuthnot, he forced the surrender of the city, with its garrison of 5,000, in a stunning and serious defeat for the rebel cause. - Needs at least one citation, if not more.
In June, an attack under Clinton's command was made on Fort Sullivan at Charleston, South Carolina. It was a humiliating failure, and his campaign in the Carolinas was called off. - Needs a citation here.
In May, working together with Admiral Mariot Arbuthnot, he forced the surrender of the city, with its garrison of 5,000, in a stunning and serious defeat for the rebel cause. - Citation needed, and also rewriting as it sounds
WP:OR again.
The whole section 'Early Life' needs a number of citations for accuracy.
Again, needs more coverage of his later career, as well as his earlier career.
The 'Evaluations' section only has two citations, yet a great deal is written in there and could do with more citations.
Looking at the "Notes" and "References" sections, they don't seem to gel. There are many books listed under "References" that don't appear in the "Notes" (so were they used at all?), and one in the "Notes" that has no accompanying Reference. These definitely need some work. Also, all books for which ISBN's exist (post 1966ish) should give them. (ISBNs are listed as optional in WP:CITE)
Looks good - nice selection, well presented and captioned, with appropriate licenses. However:
I'd recommend moving the portrait image under "American Revolutionary War" to the right of the page to vary placement and prevent bunching of text (and it needs a caption).
As a result of the above concerns I have placed the article on hold. This gives editors up to a week to address the issues raised (although if constructive work is underway, the hold period may be extended). I will regularly check back here to mark off those issues that have been satisfactorily resolved and to address any questions and comments you may have.
Nelson was on the way back to England from India in 1776. It's unlikely that he involved in the attack on Fort Sullivan, which happened in America. I've therefore removed the entry. --
Clithering (
talk)
16:15, 9 September 2009 (UTC)reply
Title of this article
Who else thinks that the title of this article is atrocious? Might I suggest "Henry Clinton (British soldier)" or "Henry Clinton (British commander)" or some-such.
TuckerResearch (
talk)
15:23, 4 November 2010 (UTC)reply
I just stumbled upon this article and noticed this same problem. While I don't support removing the parenthetical, it is excessively long. Considering that, shouldn't we rename the many "Henry Clinton" articles with something shorter? I will make a new section below, since it has been six years.
DaltonCastle (
talk)
01:40, 22 June 2016 (UTC)reply
Seven Years War
I have made adjustments to this element based on the Unit History and the Army Rolls of the period. The unit history shows that his unit, 2nd Battalion, 1st Foot Guards deployed in July 1760 which is why he wasn't in Germany before. There is no involvement of the 2nd Battalion, 1st Foot Guards (or any of that Regiment) at the Battles of Corpach (which was before they arrived) and Kloster Kampen. The same unit history is quite specific about where Clinton was wounded and it was not the battle of Freiberg. The campaign history of the Seven Years War suggests that Prince Ferdinand was no where near the Battle of Freiberg and it was fought by the Prussian Army. The date of his promotion is in the Army Rolls but he was still held to Establishment of 1st Foot Guards in 1763. The units of the Regiment returned via Holland in January 1763 but it is not stated whether Clinton was with them but it seems unlikely.
He purchased
Colonel in Chief (which is not command) of the 12th Regiment of Foot (the Suffolk Regiment) on 28 November 1766 but this is not chronologically in sequence and beyond the Seven Years War. The unit was commanded by Lieutenant Colonel William Picton. The discussion regarding friendships is not my expertise and I have left it. I hope this helps clarify this part of his history.
Family locator (
talk)
03:07, 4 November 2013 (UTC)reply
Potential title move
Its been several years since the discussion, but what are everyone's thoughts about moving this page, as well as the pages for the other "Henry Clintons" to shorter, less cumbersome titles? Thoughts?
DaltonCastle (
talk)
01:41, 22 June 2016 (UTC)reply
Both the men who would otherwise have their biographies at
Henry Clinton were British Army officers, so including "British Army officer" in their disambiguations seems pointless to me, since it all it does it result in a five-word disambiguation where the first four words are identical. It's also arguably a violation of
WP:PARENDIS, which mandates that article title disambiguation should have "only as much additional detail as necessary". So I would advocate at least dropping that, in favour of
Henry Clinton (born 1730) and
Henry Clinton (born 1771), though personally I think
Henry Clinton (1730–1795) and
Henry Clinton (1771–1829) would be much better and is more encyclopaedic. But the titles I think would be best, and would be most useful to our readers, would be
Henry Clinton (American Revolutionary War) and
Henry Clinton (Napoleonic Wars), since I think there are far more people who, when typing "Henry Clinton" into the search box and seeing their list of options drop down, would be able to tell instantly which general they're looking for from that general's most notable war than from sets of dates that are rather close together.
Binabik80 (
talk)
20:00, 21 September 2016 (UTC)reply
Trouble with that is that they were British and we call the contretemps in North America the American War of Independence, not the American Revolutionary War.
DuncanHill (
talk)
20:37, 21 September 2016 (UTC)reply
Yes, I know what we call the American Revolutionary War, but luckily
Wikipedia has a mechanism to overcome exactly this sort of problem. An argument could be made for either term in his disambiguation, since he was indeed British but is notable for an overwhelmingly American topic. I mean, I would be very surprised if British page views of both Sir Henry Clintons combined add up to the same number as American page views of this Sir Henry Clinton alone. (He is, for instance, currently
a recurring character on an American network television programme, though other characters have repeatedly referred to him as "Sir Clinton".) I'd prefer "American Revolutionary War" as the main title, but that's because I've always preferred that as being much more natural English than "American War of Independence"; I wouldn't object to it going the other way. Or there's always the inferior option of the birth and death dates.
Binabik80 (
talk)
22:05, 21 September 2016 (UTC)reply
This article was at
Henry Clinton (American War of Independence) for a very long time; it was moved, apparently without discussion, in November 2015. I further note that "born 1730" is IMHO a misstatement, because his exact year of birth is not currently known with precision (see article's first non-lede paragraph). Magic♪piano22:34, 21 September 2016 (UTC)reply
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on
Henry Clinton (British Army officer, born 1730). 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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.