Hello Imonoz. Welcome to the English version of Wikipedia
Thank you for your participation in this project. We hope that you will stay to contribute and that you will find the collaboration process enjoyable.
Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia that started in 2001 and is free for all to use and edit under certain guidelines and principles that all users should understand and adhere to. These principles and guidelines are listed below. Click on the link next to the images for more information.
	The five pillars of Wikipedia. The fundamental principles of the project.		Help. How to get help.
	Tutorial. This tutorial is a basic guide to editing.		Your user pages and your sandbox. How to experiment and edit in your user space.
	Mentoring program. Request help in your first steps of editing.		How to start a page. Help on creating your first article.
	Things to avoid. How to avoid common errors and mistakes.		Style Guide. How to write in an acceptable style.
	Main policies of Wikipedia. Wikipedia's main policies and guidelines.		Frequently asked questions. Some common questions and their answers.
	Help Desk. Here you can ask other editors for assistance		Quick reference. A handy quick reference guide for editing Wiki.
This is your Talk page where you can receive messages from other Wikipedians and discuss things with them. At the end of your messages you must put your signature by signing with four ~~~~ (just as I have done) or by pressing the button in the editor bar as shown here in the picture. By the way, you don't need to sign edits that you make in the articles themselves as those messages will be deleted. Another valuable page that may provide information and assistance is User:Persian Poet Gal/"How-To" Guide to Wikipedia. My name is Buster7. If you have any questions or face any initial hurdles, feel free to contact me on my talk page and I will do what I can to assist or give you guidance and contact information. Good Luck editing!

```Buster Seven Talk 14:17, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Imonoz. Check my reply on my talk page and also my recent comment to "The Deluge" article discussion page.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Deluge_%28history%29#.3D.3D.3D.3D.3D

Regards, Peter558 (talk) 16:59, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to try and fill in all the redlinks found in this info box: [1]. While I do have several sources, I'm going to rely on Podhorodecki mostly and to some extent pl wiki just to get something down "on paper" first. Please keep an eye on the infobox and the redlinks turning blue, and if you want to help, that would be much appreciated. Also, if you have sources which or info which contradicts Podhorodecki please bring it up readily. My sense of it is that Pdohorodecki is very good at giving a "big picture" kind of thing on the conflict (and he's actually sort of pro-Swedish) but the source is pretty old (25+ years) and of course written from a Polish perspective. Hence, additional reliable sources would be much welcome.VolunteerMarek 01:11, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Along those line I've started with Siege_of_Fellin.VolunteerMarek 01:12, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll see what I can do, not sure I will be able to help much though, my era is not really this war but I have some books for it. If I have any information to add I will.Imonoz (talk) 13:19, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I sent you an email.VolunteerMarek 22:58, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

According to Polish sources in Crossing of the Düna participated only Saxon-Russian troops. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.231.29.36 (talk) 23:25, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you are interested in battles between Sweden and Poland I recommend you this page http://www.historycy.org/index.php?showforum=206 You can register there and ask about topics that interest You. In this forum is also Radosław Sikora who wrote about the Battle of Gniew as inconclusive. So you can ask him about this battle, if you are interested.

Soon I will write an article about several battles of Polish–Swedish War (1600–1611) and (1621-1625) So I'm counting on your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.231.29.36 (talk) 00:00, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok is me 89.231.29.36. You have any information on the Battle of Mitau (present day Jelgava) in August 1622? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kcdlp (talk • contribs) 00:41, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Mitau it was quite a large battle as on fight in Livonia and battle was a indecisive but the Swedes have suffered quite big losses Kcdlp (talk) 01:55, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You know anything about a battle during the Polish-Swedish War (1617-1618)? I think there was not battles in this war but I could be wrong. Kcdlp (talk) 15:35, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

According to Polish sources Krzysztof Radziwiłł went to Livonia and then Wolmar Farensbach switches side again. Poles regained all the fortresses with the exception of Pärnu which was too strongly fortified. After regaining most of the losses, the Lithuanian army marched into suspiciously behaving Courland. Radziwiłł wanted to join all the Courland to Lithuania, however Sigismund III Vasa did not agree to it, and left total authority over the duchy Frederick Kettler. Offended Radziwiłł on the king resigned from the high command in Livonia and gave it to Colonel Jan Siciński that having only 100 soldiers moved to Estonia. As the Swedes locked themselves in fortresses, and Lithuanian army did not have enough infantry and artillery, so the war ended. Signed a truce. Pärnu was to be returned by the Swedes a year and a day after the approval of the arrangement by Sigismund. We can expand the article about this war.Kcdlp (talk) 16:52, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Puck was besieged and captured by Stanisław Koniecpolski and probably there was a battle. I'd have to check this. Vistula it might be the battle in which the Swedes fired on Polish ships. There were also two other battle Kieżmark in 1627 (on crossing of the Vistula). Battle of Kroppenhof 1621 was the largest battle in campaign 1621 and Battle of Mitau was the biggest battle of campaign 1622. These were two other battles.Kcdlp (talk) 18:56, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see that You wrote an article about the Battle of Zelbork and Wenden. I have some comments about the number of troops according to information contained on this website http://rkp91.strefa.pl/wenden,selbork.html In Wenden 600-700 soldiers is wrong (was probably less than 300 men and probably the only part of the army took part in the battle) Swedish army taking part in the battle also was lower as 2,500 men (according to Swedish sources only 250 men). on this website is a description of this Battle of Wenden (Horn battle report- if You want I can write you reports from this battle). Probably the number of troops under Zelbork is also overstated. Kcdlp (talk) 22:41, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In the battle had taken 250 men of Swedish Army. It was to be a Finnish company (Landsryttare), Finnish cuirassiers and musketeers. These separate forces left Wenden and went on reconnaissance(task the whole Swedish army was to combine with the forces of De la Gardie in Riga). Encountered Lithuanian squad (they were a force separate from the whole "Lithuanian army" Pac) with which began to fight. Then Horn learned that, contrary to his orders, The rest of his army left Wenden and marched in his direction. Moved up to her and formed those troops in defensive formation. Horn did not want that his army was attacked during march. Horn then returned to the fighting vanguard and then know real number of the Lithuanian troops. So he sent orders to the rest of the troops (Horn there may have 2500 men), to joined for his fighting vanguard. However, since these troops were marching too slowly (there was infantry). Lithuanians they could leave the battlefield before the arrival of the main forces. Horn not said that Lithuanians fled in disorder or panic. So it was an organized retreat. Lithuanians broke up the bridges, which effectively made ​​it impossible for their to catch up. About losses of Lithuanians, Horn wrote that he could not get a prisoner and He does not mention causing more than a few losses.Kcdlp (talk) 23:35, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Horn wrote in a letter that he wanted to join the De la Gardie. Unfortunately, as a losses at the Battle of Zelbork Horn does not write anything, need to find this information somewhere else. Yes the Battle of Wenden and Zelbork and took place on the same day. Maybe De la Gardie did not know anything about the intentions Horn? and that is why attacked Gosiewski. Horn in the letter does not mention anything about the cooperation with the De la Gardie. By the way fighting in Livonia 1621-1629 are very poorly examined.Kcdlp (talk) 00:08, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Horn's description of the letter about the battle of Wenden which was sent by Daniel Staberg (It is a Swede it would be worthwhile to contact him. This is probably his profile http://gu-se.academia.edu/DanielStaberg ) to user of this forum to which earlier I gave the link. Tomorrow I also look for something on these two battles. So can I find something on this subject I'll write. Kcdlp (talk) 01:02, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Ostród took place on 23 October 1628. Mercenary harquebusiers regiment under the command of Colonel Wulf Henrik von Baudissin was attacked by Poles. In the course of the struggle Swedes have suffered heavy losses, himself colonel Baudissin and 50 soldiers were taken into captivity and lost 3 banners. That's all I know about this battle.Kcdlp (talk) 23:35, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to find something about these two battles. But it will be very difficult to find anything on this subject.Kcdlp (talk) 16:44, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately these battles are rather weakly described.

Under Tryszki December 14, 1701 Grzegorz Ogiński attacked the camp of Charles XII. Accused Ogiński that resulted in the entry of Swedish troops in Lithuania in early 1702.

Druskieniki March 1702, Lithuanian pospolite ruszenie broke vanguard of Swedish army commanded by Humerjelm.

Wilno April 3, 1702 Lithuanians commanded by Ludwik Pociej and Nowosielski tried recapture town. Lithuanians were defeated and lost guns.

There were other battles. Piotrków 1702, Lubomirski defeated the Swedes led by Horn. Chybice June 1704, Michał Wiśniowiecki defeated the Swedes. (in both of these battles Poles had numerical superiority). And were still battles after Kliszów in which (according to Polish sources) Charles XII was close of capture and several hundred Swedes were taken into captivity (according to Swedish sources about 300).Kcdlp (talk) 18:44, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Polish books on this war is a bit low because many Polish sources is located in the archives in Vilnius and St. Petersburg making them difficult to access. Overall, the largest number of Polish history books is about seventeenth century because there was a lot of victories and the events of that age had an impact on fall of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, whereas in the eighteenth century was not enough victories and all eclipsed Constitution of May 3 and Partitions of Poland. Under Chybice 1704, Swedish troops was (depending on the source) from 300, 500, 800 to 1,200, the most probable seem to be from 300 to 500.Kcdlp (talk) 21:11, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Saladen whether it is this battle in which the Swedes captured more than 1,000 banners? because once I read about of such battle and the name seems familiar to me. And as for Battle of Poznań (1704) according to Polish sources, August 18, 1704 (Gregorian calendar) there was a skirmish which won the Saxon-Polish army and the Swedish army retreated to Toruń. I'll try to find something more about it. I have a question about Northern Seven Years' War because in this war, Russia also participated which was initially in alliance with Sweden. In 1568, there has been a reversal of alliances, Poland was in alliance with Sweden and Denmark with Russia. Whether Swedish books on this war mention the participation of Russia in this war?Kcdlp (talk) 22:07, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

About these banners in the Battle of Saladen information I found here (latest post and on the next page about this writes)is written here that the Swedes captured more than 1,000 banners, standards and other flags. And this is the largest number of flags captured by the Swedes during the Great Northern War. Probably this information comes from a Swedish source because the author of this post have a friend in Sweden, which has access to the archive in Stockholm and has a lot of information from him.

According to Polish sources. October 5, 1563 was signed in Copenhagen Polish-Danish alliance under which the two countries agreed to jointly act against Sweden and Russia. February 16, 1567, Russia and Sweden signed alliance against Lithuania. Peace negotiations began in 1568. The result was the signing of 22 June 1570 in Moscow, a three-year truce, confirmed in a signed peace Szczecin on December 13, which ended the Swedish-Danish war.

In Poland First Northern War (I Wojna Północna 1563-1570) is also known as the Seven Years War (Wojna Siedmioletnia). And Livonian War (Wojny Inflanckie 1558–1583). So in Poland First Northern War is known as the conflict of the years 1563-1570. Are in Sweden is the same?Kcdlp (talk) 01:16, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On the Polish Wikipedia is:

Skirmish of Kościan October 4,1655 Poles were from 80 to 100 men were also supported by inhabitants of the city were led by Krzysztof Żegocki. Swedes was 200-400 soldiers in garrison and 100 cavalry escort (Swedish garrison commander is not known, escort commander Ludvig de Nassau). Poles took the city.

Battle of Jarosław March 15, 1656, Poles under the command of Stefan Czarniecki defeated the Swedes led by Charles X Gustav

Battle of Nisko March 28, 1656, Again, Poles under the command of Stefan Czarnecki and Swedes led by Charles X Gustav. The outcome of the battle is a problem because the article says something else and the table also

Skirmish of Kozienice April 6, 1656, Poles under the command of Stefan Czarnecki and Swedes led by Tornskjöld. Poles there were 400 (all cavalry) and Swedes 300 (100 infantry and 200 cavalry). Poles in this skirmish defeated the Swedes. Polish losses amounted 56 killed and Swedes 240 killed and 32 wounded.

Battle of Kcynia June 1, 1656, Poles under the command of Stefan Czarnecki and Swedes led by Charles X Gustav. The Swedes defeated the Poles.

Battle of Tykocin July 13, 1656, Poles under the command of Samuel Oskierko and Swedes and Brandenburg-Prussian army led by Bogusław Radziwiłł. The battle ended Swedish-Brandenburg victory.

Battle of Łowicz August 25, 1656, Poles under the command of Stefan Czarnecki and Swedes led by Hans Böddeker. The battle ended with the victory of Poles.

Battle of Lubrze August 28 or September 10, 1656, Poles under the command of Andrzej Grudziński and Swedes led by Jan Vekart z Vřesovic. The battle ended with the victory of Poles.

Battle of Skałat (I need to find some information here)

Battle of Magierów July 11, 1657 Poles defeated here Transylvan-Cossack-Moldavian-Wallachian troops.

Battle of Czarny Ostrów July 20, 1657 Polish-Tatar armies defeated Transylvan-Cossack-Moldavian-Wallachian troops.

Battle of Szkudy, battle between the Poles and Swedes. I only know that the Poles have won this battle.

Battle of Głowa, same battle between the Poles and Swedes. And I only know that the Poles have won this battle.

I will try to later add description of these battles. And look in the books if there are any other battle.Kcdlp (talk) 05:12, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I know that in the book Jan Wimmer "Historia piechoty polskiej do roku 1864" (The history of the Polish infantry to the year 1864) is a mention of the Battle of Ujście. July 24, Wittenberg Army came to Ujście. The Polish army was commanded by Krzysztof Opaliński and Andrzej Grudziński. Poles rejected a call to surrender. Poles occupied the crossing of the river and took the convenient position of the defense. Wittenberg set guns in front of Polish ramparts and began firing. Łan's infantry (1,400 men) commanded by Władysław Michał Skoraszewski assisted by volunteers for five hours defending his position which protected the bridges over Gwda and Noteć. When infantry ran out of gunpowder (exploded warehouse of gunpowder) Grudzinski gave the order to evacuate the crew from the ramparts, The Swedes took the fortifications and set his guns there and began artillery fire of the Polish Cavalry gathered on the opposite shore Noteć. At this time, 4 km downstream Swedish cavalry took crossing under Dziembowo through which the Swedish infantry went to the other side of the river. At the news of attempt to outflanked, Polish command was inclined to negotiate. What to losses, I do not know. I'll try to there anything else find about the losses and information on the rest of the battles. Kcdlp (talk) 15:44, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have this book.Kcdlp (talk) 17:17, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know from what source there are information on the Swedish losses in Battle of Nowy Dwór Mazowiecki?Kcdlp (talk) 22:57, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In 1700 under Riga was Lithuanian pospolite ruszenie (without the consent of parliament but took part in Augustus expedition), the first battle in which have participated Polish-Lithuanian army was Battle of Tryszki in 1701. So participated unofficially since 1700, like the picture. The war began officially in 1704, also as in the picture. Skirmish at Bender is part of Great Northern War, but here Ottomans the fight against the Sweden. Ottoman-Russian war ended Treaty of Adrianople in 1713. So in 1714 are unlikely to have participated in Great Northern War.Kcdlp (talk) 00:56, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There was no Ottoman-Swedish War. Writing about Skirmish at Bender I mean participation Ottomans after 1711 in Great Northern War. In the Polish Wikipedia is written about Treaty of Adrianople, this: Treaty of Adrianople in 1713, the peace treaty, concluded June 24, 1713 in Adrianople between Ottoman Empire and Russian Tsardom. The Treaty ended the Turkish-Russian war, waged in the years 1710-1713 (I think it should be here 1710-1711, because next it is written). And continued after that, even two years of war (that is, there must be a mistake in the previous sentence). Was concluded for a period of 25 years. As a whole confirmed Treaty of the Pruth. Under the treaty, Russia agreed to remove its troops from Polish-Lithuanian territory. Russia also agreed to territorial concessions.

Confederation of Greater Poland formed June 9, 1703 was directed against Augustus. Warsaw Confederation established February 16, 1704 dethroned Augustus and announced the interregnum. July 12, 1704 assisted by Swedish troops announced the king Stanisław Leszczyński, which was a usurpation because king in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth could only be chosen in free elections. This resulted in that the proponents of Augustus formed a Sandomierz Confederation May 20, 1704 and this was the real beginning of the Civil War in Poland. Although in Lithuania, the civil war began much earlier in 1700 but with interruptions. Civil war ended Treaty of Altranstädt but were still fighting until 1709. Augustus came to the throne after the Battle of Poltava. I do not know exactly when.Kcdlp (talk) 02:23, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know any battle, which are not in campaignbox Polish–Swedish War (1621–1625) and (1626–1629)?Kcdlp (talk) 01:12, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much. Battle of Listenhoffen (Listenhoff) was probably in October 12, 1625. Unless that's a different battle. Battle of Grubin (Grabiny) was in August 27, 1626 Swedes defeated here Gdańsk army. About Legowo, I know nothing about this battle. I'll try to find something. Same with Lemsal. In my opinion should be Polish-Swedish war 1621-1622 and 1625-1629.Kcdlp (talk) 16:43, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know the exact date Battle of Legowo? I found probably information about this battle.Kcdlp (talk) 19:38, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is information about the Battle of Grubin comes from a letter Axel Oxenstierna? because here this battle is described (There are three descriptions one from of Polish source and two from the Swedish). In Poland this battle is known as the Battle of Langfelde (Długie Pole). Where Sikora writes about the Battle of Legowo? It seems to me that Battle of Grebin and Battle of Legowo is in fact the same battle. Yes these villages are located close to each other (Długie Pole and Grabiny-Zameczek). According to Polish sources: Poles (8 banners cossack style cavalry) commanded by Paweł Czarniecki attacked the Swedes (12 banners cavalry) forcing them to flee. Poles chasing Swedish cavalry were ambushed (several hundred Swedish infantry was hidden and attacked the Poles) after the fight Poles withdrew. Poles losses is 4 killed, 6 captured (but they are not the complete losses) also lost three banners.Kcdlp (talk) 21:15, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Polish source said about 12 banners Swedish cavalry and 8 banners Poles cavalry. Poles losses is 4 killed, 6 captured (but they are not the complete losses) also lost 3 banners.

But Swedish sources (Israel Hoppe) say Poles strenght: 2 banners hussars and 13 banners cossack and Swedes strenght: 3 banners reiters under the command Åke Tott and 2 banners infantry led by Alexander Leslie. He writes only about 4 banners losses by Poles.

Second source (letter Axel Oxenstierna) Swedes strenght: 150 lattaryttare led by Åke Tott and 180 infantry led by Alexander Leslie. Poles strenght: 14 banners but only 5 of them fought with the Swedes. Also writes about the ambush (about hidden infantry) the same as the Polish source. Swedes captured 4 banners, were taken prisoner Chorąży and 8 other Polish soldiers. Swedish losses is 3 killed and 8 do 10 wounded.

"Szwedzi mieli mieć 3 zabitych (1 rajtara i 2 muszkieterów) oraz 8 do 10 rannych (‘pociętych’ więc rannych w starciu wręcz)." The Swedes have 3 killed (1 reiter and 2 musketeer) and 8 to 10 wounded ('cut' so wounded in melee combat).

There is a discrepancy in the forces on both sides. Although the course of the battle seems to be similar.Kcdlp (talk) 02:07, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Axel wrote that Poles (5 banners) attacked Swedes. Hoppe writes only about 5 banners Swedes, Oxenstierna gives the number of troops (without a amount of banners).

Polish casualties (Polish sources): 4 killed and 6 captured losses relates only to Towarzysz. There are no known losses Pocztowy. Pocztowy losses are average larger than the Towarzysz losses by 2-4 times (it also happened that were smaller from losses Towarzysz but it happened very rarely).

Polish casualties (Swedish sources, letter Oxenstierna): 9 captured.

Whether these source gives some footnotes from where is information about this battle? Because, Polish and Swedish source does not mention of ambush Poles.

According to Polish sources: Polish cavalry attacked the Swedish cavalry and forced Swedes to retreat. Cossacks chasing fleeing Swedish reiters were ambushed (Swedish musketeers attacked them) and withdrew after the fight.

According to letter Oxenstierna: 5 banners Polish cavalry attacked Swedes. Swedish musketeers hiding in ambush. They gave by surprise salvo on flank Poles, which together with the rather desperate resistance from the Finns helped repel the attack.

So, Polish and Swedish source says about hidden Swedish musketeers.Kcdlp (talk) 16:53, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is possible that it was the Swedes plan. You have more information about the Battle of Grebin in 1628? I know that, there was another battle in 1626.Kcdlp (talk) 18:02, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is the battle, which I wrote about at the beginning. Swedes defeated Gdańsk troops (mercenaries). Battle took place on August 27.Kcdlp (talk) 23:22, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

here is a description of the Battle of Listenhoff took place October 12, 1625. Swedish source is here (Gustav Horn letter to Gustav II Adolf) and Polish source ("Compendium Diariussu Expeditiej Jego Mci Pana Hetmana Wielkiego Litewskiego do Inflant w roku 1625"). Swedes led by Gustav Horn and Lithuanians commanded by Aleksander Gosiewski. Swedes strenght: (Swedish source) 10 banners reiters and 180 musketeers (total 1270 troops). (Polish source) evaluated the strength of Swedes for 1500 troops. Lithuanians strenght: (Swedish source) 1000 troops. (Polish source) 200 hussars, several hundred cossack style cavalry and 100 infantry. Lithuanians attacked the Swedes. Swedes have suffered heavy losses but managed to repel the attack Lithuanians, then the Swedes retreated. Swedish losses: (Swedish source) says only that the Swedes have suffered significant losses and Horn was wounded. (Polish source) estimates "to 200 killed" given also that Horn was wounded. Lithuanians losses: (only Polish source) a few killed and one was captured.

There is also a description of the Battle of Prolmozja, probably took place October 17, 1625. Swedes strenght: 2 banners Dragoon(300 men) led by de la Chappele. Lithuanians strenght: 2-3 banners cossack style cavalry led by Bohdanowicz and Cieliński. Lithuanians defeated the Swedes and took two banners, Swedes suffered large losses and 40 Swedes were captured (including de la Chappele).Kcdlp (talk) 00:44, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What do you know about the Battle of Lemsal 1627? and where you read about this battle? I'll try to find some Polish sources about this battle.Kcdlp (talk) 23:27, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I found out some information about the Battle of Lemsal (in Poland known as "Baldenmojza"), took place on December 14, 1627. Pawłowicz was ambushed and was defeated. Losses that are given in this book are exaggerated. Poles could have 50 killed and 10 captured.Kcdlp (talk) 16:09, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should be like before editing this User '75.155.224.187'. He could give the source of which use.

Battle of Wallhof very different in the Polish and Swedish sources. According to letter Gustav II Adolf of 21 January 1626 Lithuanians had losses from 500 to 600 men. Polish sources give similar losses. Sapieha wrote that he had before the battle 1,500 men. The maximum number of Lithuanian army I've encountered is 2,500 men.

It should be Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

That is, as I wrote above, we should undo the changes this User.Kcdlp (talk) 23:33, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the size of the Lithuanian army under Wallhof: Lithuanians had 4,000 troops in November 1625 but they were combined armies Radziwiłł and Sapieha (army report in November says about this). Radziwill and his army has not fought under Wallhof. Information about 4,000 troops (which give Swedes) came from prisoners. 4,000 is paper strength. Lithuanian Reports army after the battle also gives 500-600 losses.Kcdlp (talk) 01:39, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

According to Barkman "Kungl. Svea Livgardes historia II" Swedish losses ranged from 7600 to 8000 killed. There is a document written by the authorities of Riga, in which were noted burial 8,919 Swedes (possible that this number also includes losses of service camp). Polish-Lithuanian army suffered 79 killed and about 200 wounded. Here writes about this (in Polish)

Infantry - the name of the regiment (the name of Colonel) - number of soldiers:

Leib (Guard) Battalion: 394

Hans Rechenberg: 951

Jesper Andersson Cruus: 1590

Anders Stuart: 1738

Josef Mikaelsson: 534

Anders Lennartsson: 1402

Fredrik of Lüneburg: 400

Joakim Fredrik Von Mansfeld: 725

Finnish Battalion: 500

Artillery guards: 134

Cavalry

Royal Regiment - 1055 soldiers in 7 Swedish and 1 Livonian squadrons

Anders Lennartsson Regiment - 1035 soldiers in 1 Swedish , 4 Finnish and 4 Livonian squadrons

Joachim Frederik von Mansfeld regiment - 410 soldiers in 4 Swedish squadrons

List of squadrons cavalry:

Swedes:

Besoldningsryttare (mercenaries):

Bastian Bonadt: 75

Hovfanan (Royal Regiment): 225

Westergötland Province:

Sigge Arvidson: 125

Erik Börjelson: 143

Nils Drake: 114

Olaus Knutson: 114

Smaland province:

Johan Abel: 141

Arvid Pederson: 147

Östergötland Province:

Nils Erikson: 120

Sven Some: 122

Provinces of Uppland and Westmanland:

Hans Olofson: 125

Södermanland Province:

Peder Svensson: 98

Finnish Province:

Jöns Pederson: 180

Sigfrid Hinderson: 126

Olaus Erikson: 126

Lindorm Claesson: 100

Livonia:

Reinhold Engdes (Rennfahne - light cavalry): 124

Anders Lennartssons uppvärter (guard): 130

Gerdt Liif (Lodiske): 60

Engelbr Tysenhusen (Dorpatiske): 85

Hendrick Rehbinder (Pernauske): 74

Artillery - 11 1-pound guns

Studies Daniel Staberg based on:

Göte Göransson, Gustav II Adolf och hans folk

Bertil Barkman, Sven Lundkvist, Kungl.Svea Livgardes historia II och III

Sveriges krig 1611-1632

Mankell listor, n:o 8.

Jonas Hedberg (red.) Kungliga Artilleriet Medeltiden och äldre vasatiden.Kcdlp (talk) 21:15, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So it is true that the Swedes captured over 1000 banners in the Battle of Saladen.

I wonder what Russian sources say about this battle and what they say about banners.Kcdlp (talk) 21:15, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

With regard to Crossing of the Duna. I have not met yet with Polish sources that would speak on the participation of the Polish-Lithuanian army in this battle. I'll try to find some information on this topic. Also look for information about these battles of Drusienniki. I do not have any new information about the attack on Charles XII camp as about these other battles.Kcdlp (talk) 19:38, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'll add in a moment infobox Battle of Koniecpol. From what I know Polish sources say of 2,000 losses on the Swedish side in Battle of Kokenhausen. You have any other information about losses? Do you know or this regiment at the Battle of Duna is infantry or cavalry? and who commanded them?Kcdlp (talk) 21:16, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Courland was then a vassal state of Poland–Lithuania. I asked just out of curiosity, and I do not want make trouble for you. Do you know what the Swedish sources say about Battle of Gdov? (Here is an article on the Russian Wikipedia)Kcdlp (talk) 23:58, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the information on this battle. I asked for it because once I read about this battle and from what I remember it was a pretty random Russians victory and I wanted to know what the Swedish sources say about this battle.Kcdlp (talk) 16:18, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Once you asked about number of Swedish and Polish troops during the Second Northern War. According to Leszek Podhorodecki, 'Rapier i koncerz' in 1659 The Swedes had a total 34,000 troops, therefrom 15,000 troops fought in Denmark, 7,000 in Royal Prussia, 4,000-5,000 in Swedish Pomerania, about 3,500 in Courland and the rest in Livonia and the Swedish-Russian border. The Poles had in Prussia 5,860 troops and Brandenburg-Prussia had 7,200 troops. Were still some smaller forces that were in the Greater Poland and in Toruń but their number is unknown. In 1657 Swedes had 8,000 troops in Royal Prussia. I'll try to find something more.Kcdlp (talk) 21:56, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to add, Swedes had 8,000 troops in 1657 after the leaving of Poland by Charles X Gustav (the beginning of the year had more troops). In these figures are included the troops garrisons (almost all of these troops Swedes had in garrisons), same with the troops in 1659.

here writes that the Poles had (to fight against the Swedes in 1655) 8,735 regular troops, 4,380 łan's infantry and and about 33,000 Pospolite ruszenie (real streangth only regular troops). Corps Wittenberg had (real strength) 6,065 cavalry, 7,965 infantry, 164 dragoons, Corps Royal (real strength) had 4,274 cavalry, 7,255 infantry, 450 dragoons. There is no given numbers of Magnus de la Gardie Corps.

There also wrote in the last post "in L. Podhorodecki 'Wazowie w Polsce' I found the information that in 1656, the Swedish occupation forces reached 60,000 soldiers. To this must be added (in I-VII 1657) 25,000 army of Transylvania."

here is given Poles and Lithuanians had (in 1655) against the Cossacks and Russians: 9,400 regular army, 300 łan's infantry, 4,000 Pospolite ruszenie and Lithuanians had 10.000 troops (but this is rather the regular and irregular troops). Kcdlp (talk) 21:44, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Writing "real strenght" I mean to the exact number of troops (no paper strength).

The figures I have given about Swedish Army in 1655 probably come from the army census. While paper strength these corps: Corps Wittenberg 17,000 men and Charles X Corps 12,000 men.

Most of the Polish-Lithuanian army which fought with Russia and Cossacks (and not only) go to Swedish side in 1655. I do not know exactly how many the Polish-Lithuanian army numbered in 1656. But at the beginning of March gathered in Lviv 22,000-24,000 men (in the majority pospolite ruszenie and new recruits). At the siege of Warsaw in June 1656 was 28,500 regular army, 18,000- 20,000 pospolite ruszenie and several thousand camp servants and peasants.Kcdlp (talk) 21:52, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a list of Saxon regiments fighting in the campaign of the years 1700-1701 in Livonia and Courland. There is also mentioned Polish Guard it was the infantry. In the post 22 says that "As for the Polish guard - it was a regiment forming part of the Saxon army, was not part of the Crown army". So R. Sikora surely wrote about this regiment. Here "Royal Guard (Gwardii Koronnej, gen. Donhoff, ab. 600 men)" (This must be the Polish Guard). There is also a Queens Regiment (400 men) and light cavalry under hetman polnej koronnej S. Potocki (there must be a mistake, it should be Feliks Szczęsny Potocki), there are also the Lithuanians. See it these regiments here are also listed. Here you have a Saxon attack of Dunamunde.

Also, I wish you a happy new year.Kcdlp (talk) 13:03, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know what Swedish sources give losses for the Battle of Kłecko?Kcdlp (talk) 22:55, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Kłecko Here in the bibliography is "Radoslaw Sikora, Taktyka walki, uzbrojenie i wyposazenie husarii w latach 1576-1710". I looked for it on the internet and I found. Here on page 302 writes about the losses of both sides in this battle. Polish losses amounted to less than 70 dead and wounded and Swedish about 500 killed. Data on Polish losses come from the Czarnecki report of the battle and on the basis of Kochowski report (he participated in the battle). Both Czarniecki and Kochowski give similar losses. R. Sikora also explains why historians given earlier 1,000 killed. The report Kochowski was incorrectly read (Kochowski gives 40 dead Towarzysz historian Nowak read it as 400 killed Towarzysz and here was made error). As for the losses of Swedes, May 27, 1656 (Gregorian calendar) Swedes made cavalry census and give losses: 428 killed, 452 died of disease and wounds, 1,309 was wounded and sick.Kcdlp (talk) 02:28, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

R.Sikora also writes that the 3,000 losses on the Polish side gave Samuel Pufendorf which did not participate in this battle and considers these data greatly overstated. According to Pufendorf Poles had lost 600 killed in the battle and 2,500 in pursuit. Sikora also wrote that the battle initially was regarded as Polish victory and give there footnote to Des Noyers, "Lettres" (Des Noyers give there losses similar to Czarniecki and Kochowski). Sikora also wrote that the themselves Swedes and their allies the outcome of the battle approached without "euphoria". According to Sikora Poles had 12.000 men and Swedes 7,000 men. I think we can give a report on both sides.

In Battle of Nowy Dwór Mazowiecki 300 killed Poles comes from a report Stenbock. Sikora write that losses of Poles are known only from this report and none of the Polish sources do not confirm these data.

[2]On page 269, Sikora write about the Battle of Kliszów and give the Polish forces in this battle of 3,000-4,000 men. On page 280, Poles losses in this battle is 15-17 killed Towarzysz.

There were two battles in Tver: July 21, 1609 Poles defeated the Russian-Swedish army and two days later Russian-Swedish army defeated Poles. Aleksander Zborowski led the Poles in both battles. I once read about the forces on both sides but I would have to look for because I do not remember exactly how many of them there was.

Do you know any more battles in De la Gardie Campaign, where Swedes fought against the Poles?Kcdlp (talk) 15:01, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

R. Sikora give 16.000 - 17.000 Saxons in Battle of Kliszów (footnote according to the letter of the Saxon General Johann Matthias von der Schulenburg). Early Polish books give 80 killed Poles but were not based on sources. Anyway, the description of this battle from the Polish side, pointing out the advantage in the fight of Saxon-Polish troops until the withdrawal of the Poles.

From what I found in Battle of Twer Swedes had 3,500-4,000 men and Russians from 3,000 to 7,000. The Poles had 2,000-4,000 men (depending on the source). In the first battle of Twer, Poles captured 14 banners and 11 guns.

As for the Battle of Warsaw (1705) I do not know what he wrote about it (Could you specify where he wrote about it?). R. Sikora, in describing the battle rather use sources from both sides. For example, the Battle of Klushino according to him, the Russian-Swedish army was there 18,300 men (regular army) and with peasants and camp followers there were 38,000-48,000 men. Whereas Poles had 2,700 men. The same applies to the losses are smaller for both sides.

Anyway, I also can replace several battles, where Swedish historians do not use Polish sources e.g. Battle of Wenden (1601), Battle of Wallhof, Battle of Mitau (1622), Battle of Gniew, Battle of Górzno or Battle of Kliszów.

Under Torzjok (according to Polish sources) Poles had 30 killed but the Swedish-Russian losses are greater. In May 1610 under Torczyca, Poles defeated Russian-Swedish army. Battle of Kalazin (Russians regard that the battle for the victory) between Poles and Russian-Swedish army. Poles defeated the Russian cavalry and the Russians closed in Laager. When, to Poles came the news that the King marched into Russia, Poles went to Smolensk. And two battle under Moscow in 1609 where the Poles defeated the Russian-Swedish army. Was another battle with the French mercenaries ended Polish victory but I do not remember the battle place.Kcdlp (talk) 18:06, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

According to Polish sources, in Klissow Poles withstood these 2 volleys. Poles charge failed because Swedish infantry had Cheval de frise and could not hit a lance on infantry. Moreover, this charge was a reconnaissance (charge about 260 cavalrymen). And before there was a charge on infantry Polish cavalry defeated the Swedish cavalry. Poles generally very little force involved in the fight. Swedes having difficulty in repelling the attack of Saxon cavalry commanded by Jacob Heinrich von Flemming charge broke the Swedes and Swedes fled to the forest, only after some time, the Swedes were able to repulse the attack. By this time the initiative was Saxon-Polish side. Swedish attack on Polish positions was repulsed. When the Poles withdrew unveiled Saxon troops flank, which gave the Swedes the possibility of an attack on the flank of the Saxons.

In his book he writes about the mutiny of mercenaries (after all mercenaries surrendered), the mercenaries cavarly were broken and then De la Gardie and Evert Horn fled to the forest and when he returned to the camp, the soldiers no longer wanted to listen to his orders. 2,730 mercenaries fought with Poles, only infantry regiment Linck repeal fight with Poles. Surely mercenaries had low morale and De la Gardie escape had an effect on their surrender. Poles to reach the battlefield must go 40-60 km and fought with the rested army (Swedish sources say that?).

In Wenden Poles captured 13 banners, In this battle participated 13 Swedish regiment (7 cavalry, 5 infantry and 1 livonia nobility). In this battle the Swedes have lost all banners.

Wallhof, Lithuanians were there 1,500-2,000 men. Being closer to the truth is the first number

Gniew, Can you identify the source that says 4,000 killed Poles? Polish sources speak of much smaller losses. Interestingly the 30 dead Swedes, Oxenstierna wrote in a letter about the loss of the first day battle (that is September 22): 41 killed and 103 wounded (infantry, losses cavalry did not give). Losses on both sides were similar in that battle. Anyway, if you want, you can write to Sikora and ask about this battle, He studied Polish sources, He will write you exactly what Polish sources speak of the battle.

Górzno, Polish sources say the Swedish infantry was broken at the beginning of the battle, and the size of the Polish army was smaller as is given.

Kliszów, Yes Wagner give such a number of troops. But he ignores the Polish sources that speak about 3.000-4.000 men (Among other things, a letter Lubomirski) Lithuanian Senator Krzysztof Zawisza wrote about 8.000 Poles but he took no participation in battle and he support at this time Swedes. He also overstated the number of the army of Saxon. You also ask Sikora about it.

Chojnice, Polish sources say about capture 3 Swedish banners and Poles had not lost banners. Polish troops are spread in several villages, Swedes attacked the only one villages where there were 3 regiments of cavalry, so they can not be there 36 banners.Kcdlp (talk) 23:15, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here 274 page, Sikora writes that Ehrenschantz assessed for 12,000 Polish army, Sikora writes that he could count in the army the camp followers, because it could be there 3 times as much as the troops. On page 280, Sikora quote Otto Vellink, also I know that. Each Polish source draws attention to the fact that the infantry was protected by Cheval de frise and that was the main reason for the failure of charge. Moreover, the losses of Poles show little effectiveness volleys. Gustaf Ranck wrote that the Swedish army pursued Poles but not caught them. In turn, the Polish source said that no one was pursued them. The first charge of Poles was the Swedish cavalry, second already on infantry. Therefore why the Swedish cavalry did not prevent the Poles in the charge on infantry?

About Klushino, as the Poles came to the battlefield Russian-Swedish army then slept, how they could the mutiny? The Poles defeated the Russians and the mercenary cavalry and then De la Gardie escaped from the camp, Dmitry Shuisky also. When the Poles charge on mercenaries infantry, De la Gardie returned to camp. De la Gardie also did not reconnaissance of the Polish troops.

Here (Polish sources) you have a Swedish banners captured by the Poles during the wars of 1600-1629 (this is not a complete list). Two sources say 13 captured banners (Battle report and presentation of banners at the Sejmin Vilnius. One source give 11 captured banners, but it seems to be a less reliable source because he did not participate in the battle.)

Under Wallhof, Lithuanians could have 4,000 men but with service camp, however army there was 1,500-2,000.

Gniew. It's just that, Anders Fryxell did not give a footnote where he got this information and I see that says there 500 killed? Swedes. Oxenstierna in September 22, gave 20 killed however on September 24, he wrote already what I wrote earlier. Depending on the Polish source (participants of the battle and not just), Swedes losses are given on the first day on 360-500 killed but it is also one (wrote them participant of battle) that says, 'September 23 was counted dead and counted in 83 killed Swedes' but adds 'there were a lot of dead bodies in the woods and a several (most important) killed Swedes took with him. What is Polish losses, 13-50 killed depending on the source. And I do not know if the whole battle Poles suffered 500 killed.

Górzno, if I remember correctly Stanisław Koniecpolski (who was then at the Sejm) said that the Poles are 4.000 troops in Prussia. Later, I check for more information in books about this battle.

Chojnice, Battle of Chojnice (1656) Here you have a description of the battle according to De Noyers, every Polish source give more or less the same.

I do not know how much estimates Saxons losses (but probably about 1,500 killed) but I know the only losses of Poles that is 15-17 killed. I not interested in too much Great Northern War, therefore I quote the Polish Wikipedia. Result: tactical inconclusive, strategic Saxon victory. Strength: 7,000 Swedes and 4,900 Saxons. Losses: Swedes 1,500 men and Saxons 500 men and 1 gun (according to Zbigniew Anusik, Karol XII, Wrocław-Warszawa-Kraków 2006)Kcdlp (talk) 04:43, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hieronim Lubomirski was not a supporter of August, perhaps this had an impact on the withdrawal of the Poles, looking at his behavior after the battle (Poles captured several hundred Swedes and Lubomirski release them). Show me the battle in 1626 where the musket fire stopped hussars charge. Under Gniew, was a bad terrain for charge, there were ditches, hillocks. Losses from the musket fire were negligible. How Swedish cavalry had certainty, That the rest Polish cavalry did not support those 260 cavalrymen who charge?

Swedish sources overestimated the size of the Polish troops under Klushino. Poles did not attacked Russians and Swedes as they slept because they had to wait for the rest of the troops and Poles had to burn the village of Prieczistoje and dismantle fences which lasted nearly an hour so that Russians and mercenaries, they saw Poles. Poles first attacked Russians, when they defeated. Poles attacked the mercenaries and their reject from fences, so did a place to charge. De la Gardie much earlier escaped from the camp (Both Polish and Russian sources say about escape of De la Gardie). And when he returned to camp it was too late. Dmitri Szujski took refuge in the Russian camp, only after the surrender of mercenaries fled. Moscow was saved? Żółkiewski in August 3, was already in Moscow.

Wenden, witness the presentation of banners to the Sejm whether battle report is a more reliable source from a person who has not seen those banners. Author of the book "Vägen till Stormakt" give a footnote where he got this information? The Poles had there 700 men, so how can there be 11 banners? and Poles did not have there guns. If the Swedes captured many banners and guns, why they lost this battle? Losses that are given in this Swedish book, are very similar to those that Polish sources say about Swedish losses (11-13 banners, 100 captured and all guns).

Wallhof, in November 1625 was a census Lithuanian troops, there were 4.000 troops (There were troops two hetmans Sapieha and Radziwiłł) at the Battle of Wallhof participated only Sapieha troops and therefore was there from 1,500-2,000 troops.

Gniew, "Sveriges Krig" do not have to use the Polish sources when describing this battle. Poles withdrew on October 2 but before that, went out into the field and waited there for the Swedes. About losses I wrote earlier are different according to the Polish sources.Kcdlp (talk) 19:06, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

After the Battle of Kliszów, Lubomirski sent the cavalry to scout and in a few skirmishes captured several hundred Swedes. Gustav II Adolf did reform on Dutch model (Maurice). What mercenaries under Kircholm different from the army of Gustav? Gustav something rarely go out in the field during the war in Royal Prussia. In this book (about the Battle of Gniew), what you provided does not have footnotes, so I do not know from what sources the author used (probably Swedish).

About the link to the forum Daniel Staberg could as mentioned how many hussars in these battles.

Torzjok 1609, numerical superiority of the enemy, and it was the army of the Polish-Russian hussars there was a smaller part of the troops

Twer 1609, The first battle is won and the second lost, the same numerical superiority of the enemy, and Polish-Russian army

Wallhof 1626 numerical superiority of the enemy and attack by surprise

Wenden 1626 was not there the battle what once I wrote (in Talk Page Battle of Selburg)

Mewe 1626 Polish sources say something different about this battle

Dirschau 1627 This battle was not a defeat of Poles

Treiden 1627 about this battle I have not heard, maybe he meant the battle of 1628 which Poles won (He mentioned in another post Treiden 1627 as a Polish victory)

Gorzno 1629 numerical superiority of the enemy and not a great number of hussars

Honigfelde 1629 it was a Polish victory (and I will add that the description of the battles of the Polish sources is quite different and I do not mean losses)

Wojnicz 1655 there were only 400 hussars (paper strength)

Golab 1656 there were only 360 hussars

San 1656 certainly in terms of Sandomierz, hussars went into Warka under Sandomierz was Pospolite ruszenie

Gniezno 1656 according to Polish sources, Swedish success in this battle was that they did not give a smash, losses say the same thing.

Warsaw 1656 there was a hussar 900-1000, 2nd day battle took place charge 300 hussars in which was wounded King of Sweden, in turn, Polish sources say that John II Casimir squandered chances to win because they do not gave the rest of the cavalry to support hussars.

Filipow 1656 there were a maximum two banners of hussars although in this battle hussars presence is questioned

Klisow 1702 I think about it I wrote enough

Saladen 1703 there was no hussars

I could also mention here the same number of battles won by the of Poles (after 1611) such as Poswol 1625, Riga 1621, Riga 1622, Mitau 1626, Bauska 1626, Duna 1625, Kieżmark 1627, Szmeltyn 1622, Prolmojza 1625, Pokrzywno 1628, Rypin 1628, is also a lot of victories in the time the Deluge.

De la Gardie escaped when Poles defeated the mercenary cavalry. Russians fled first but most were in the camp, Shujski was also in the camp, Shujski escaped only after surrender mercenaries. According to Polish sources, De la Gardie greatly contributed to the defeat in the battle. Only the census of Polish army says 2,700 men and not 5,000-10,000. Barkman wrote about the losses Swedish in Kircholm 7000-8000, is also a report in the Riga City Council says that 8,900 Swedes buried.

Participant of the battle presented these banners at the Sejm and he said about 13 banners. Battle report also says about 13. A person who give the number 11 banners captured is a chronicler who has not seen those banners and also battle, so it is less reliable source. Only that Saladen and Wenden is over 100 years difference. Average number of soldiers in the banners (in the Polish Army) in 1600 years is about 150 men and in 1700 years is 25 men. So it is not realistic and one more thing at Saladen captured wagons with banners. The historian should provide a footnote where did the information otherwise, it is less reliable. The same author made ​​a mistake in the Battle of Lemsal writing that took place in March 1627 (at that time was a truce in Livonia) If the historian does not provide footnotes, how can I be sure that the use of Polish sources? the more that what he wrote about this battle, fit in to the Swedish losses in this battle.

I know that in November 1625, Lithuanian had 4.000 troops (I do not remember exactly how much I would have to check) Radziwiłł was 35 km away from Sapieha operated separately because Radziwill and Sapieha families were in conflict for influence in Lithuania, Gosiewski got the command of troops after the defeat Sapieha under Wallhof. Lithuanians had 4,000 troops in November 1625, Lithuanians at that time no more troops recruited, in November and December were fought battle in which the Lithuanians gained several castles, so also suffered some losses were certainly still desertions. [3] on page 25, Sikora says that Sapieha had 1.500 men.

About 100 killed and wounded in October 1.Kcdlp (talk) 23:21, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You do not want to say that the mercenaries who were in the Swedish army under Kircholm were worse than the Swedish infantry from the years 1620-1630? Swedish regiments were poorly trained who took part in the Battle of Kircholm. Mercenaries fought in the Dutch style, it was the same under Weissenstein. Under Kircholm were pikemen and mercenaries were very good the equipments with firearms. Moreover, in Thirty Years' War Swedes also had a lot of mercenaries, you say that they were much better trained than those mercenaries in Kircholm? Write, where Poles hid in fortifications against Gustav, or Grudziądz in 1628? Malbork 1629? Poles used guerrilla warfare to destroy the Swedes communication (experience of fighting with Tatars). Tell me what the city Swedes captured by assault? I will answer you Brodnica (Strasburg) and how many casualties had Swedes in this operation? 4,000-5,000 killed, wounded and deserters. Cities such as Elbląg, Malbork, Frombork, Orneta, Tczew, Gniew, Starogard Gdański, Dobre Miasto all these city surrendered to Gustav without a fight. Are Swedes took to many cities at the beginning of the war if they had to siege the city? Probably got stuck to the Elblag. Duchy of Prussia also facilitated Gustavus the landing in Baltiysk, Elector did not even fought against the Swedes. In Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth of command in battle were Hetmans not king.

Except that Swedish cavalry (without the support of infantry or artillery) very rarely won with hussars.

In the first Battle of Tver, the Poles captured 11 banners and a few guns, only source not write, how many of these banners were Russian and how many were Swedish. Wallhof, So the Swedish source, reject census of the Lithuanian army? Dirschau 1627, defeat the cavalry was, but hussars there not charge, they were attacked as it retreated to the camp. Treiden 1627, I do not exclude that the Swedes won there, but in the Battle of Treiden 1628 was the moment in which the Finnish cavalry defeated the Lithuanian cavalry at the beginning of the battle but later it was otherwise. I have not heard of the battle of Treiden in 1627, Daniel Staberg wrote a few posts below that Treiden 1627 was Polish victory so it is possible that a mistake, but it is worth checking whether there was another battle. Gniezno 1656, Czarnecki wrote that the battle lasted more than 4 hours another source says that lasted 5 hours, 500 killed comes from Swedish sources (Riksarkivet Stockholm, Rullor 1656, vol 10.) Three Polish sources say similar loss is 70 killed and wounded (Czarniecki, Kochowski, Des Noyers), Under Gniew Swedes give 4,000 Poles killed with their own losses 500 and the fight lasted for more than 4 or 5 hours also impressive result. Warszawa 1656, hussars was repelled but the charge was initially successful these 300 hussars had against each other a lot more enemy troops, so it's hard to win without the support of the rest of the cavalry. Kliszów 1702, Yes, they were defeated but not by musketeers fire but by the terrain obstacles (musketeers fire also had an impact but mostly psychological, Poles suffered small losses, each Polish source emphasizes terrain obstacles which prevented the perform of the charge on infantry, and it had a major impact on the failure of a charge) and that he withdrew from the battle that's decision Lubomirski. Saladen 1703 from what I know Lithuanians were light cavalry there, you have Order of battle?

Poswol 1625, Bauska 1626, Mitau 1626, Kieżmark 1627 (Gustav Adolf was even wounded there) and the rest of what I mentioned is the bigger skirmishes (nearly one thousand men from each side except Prolmojza I mentioned it because there 2 captured banners), about of these smaller I do not mention.

De la Gardie fled to the forest with Horn. I do not write that he was a bad commander, Polish sources say that very contributed to a defeats and generally made ​​a few mistakes. Morale certainly mercenaries had low, in turn, the Poles had very high morale in this battle, this had a major impact on the outcome of the battle. In turn, the Poles were tired of marching and the Russian-Swedish army rested.

Kungl. Svea Livgardes historia II, This is a Barkman book from 1939, probably benefit from the Swedish sources, if I remember he was one of historians who write Sveriges Krig (correct me if I'm wrong). This would also suggest that the use of the Swedish sources.

[4] page 275 in the table you have a number of soldiers in the banners. The first number is the paper strength and the second real number (approximately). In 1700 years, the Polish army had a lot of vacancies and had a very large financial gaps, in turn in 1600 years at the beginning of the war with Sweden, Poland had no large army in Livonia but they have a lot more soldiers in banners. Swedish sources on this battle I do not know, but Polish sources report similar losses Swedes and one more thing, before previously I did not pay any attention here according to the report of the battle, Poles were in this battle 6 banners, there is also given how many squadron which gained Swedish banners:

• chorągiew husarii Krzysztofa Radziwiłła Pioruna pod Wincentym Woyną – captured 3 banners

• chorągiew husarii Ostafija Tyszkiewicza – captured 3 banners

• chorągiew husarii Ludwika Wejhera (Weyhera) – captured 3 banners

• chorągiew husarii Wawrzyńca Rudomino – captured 1 banner

• chorągiew kozacka Szczęsnego Niewiarowskiego – captured 1 banner

• poczet (husaria?) Krzysztofa Dorohostajskiego pod Łukaszem Ligowskim – captured 2 banners

Unlikely that, there was 4,000 troops Sapieha. Sapieha spoke about 1.500 troops, censuses the army also do not give such large numbers (and I think this is the most reliable source). 4,000 (combined Radziwill and Sapieha troops) was in November last year, Sapieha by this time had no recruitment troops. If Radziwiłł was under Wallhof his army that it was possible to 4,000 men but Radziwiłł was not there. According to Polish sources, Sapieha had 1,500-2,000 troops but only with the of the camp followers could be 4,000 men.Kcdlp (talk) 03:51, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mistake Swedes in the Battle of Kircholm was that came out of their fortifications in the field. By what, made it easier for the Poles and Lithuanians win this battle. Swedes had a not enough pikemen? 600 hussars and Courland reiter charge on 5,600 Swedes (Swedes have there more pikemen as Poles and Lithuanians Hussars, Swedes had there also 9 guns) and somehow Swedes did not give the beat the hussars. Do you think that the mercenaries who fought in the style of Dutch and Spanish were weak? Gustav did in most the same reforms as Maurice of Nassau (when it comes to infantry). Give this example where Poles avoided battle? So, Swedish source do not speak that which city conquered by assault? Elbląg was then greater than Stockholm, had modern fortifications and do you think that the Swedes conquered these city by assault? However, the Poles had to siege these city to recapture them and as we know Polish army are mostly cavalry not infantry, thus it was very difficult regain these cities.

As for Wenden, "a squadron of Swedish cavalry routed five banners of hussars" only that the Swedish general says, Polish sources say that the cavalry was defeated but it was definitely more than one Swedish squadron. Typical cavalry battle was Poswol, where were defeated Swedish reiters.

Write to him, I'll try to find more information from the Polish side. Gniezno, losses 3.500 killed Poles do not have support in Polish sources. Each Polish source gives smaller losses as 100 killed and wounded. Swedes somehow were not happy with the course of this battle. And how to explain 4 killed Swedes in Battle of Nowy Dwór Mazowiecki and 300 killed Poles (only Swedes give these losses) battle lasted more than an hour. Without obstacles terrain, usually the Swedish infantry was defeated, e.g. Mitau 1622 (1 August and 3 August, both charge were successful and the Swedes suffered big losses), Treiden 1628, Bauska 1626, Riga 1621 and other. What I meant is rather that a decisive influence on the failure of the charge were obstacles terrain, not fire muskets.

Mitau July 17, 1626. Gosiewski defeated von Thurn losses from 130 to 320 killed and captured Swedes (depending on the source). Poswol September 29, 1625 was a cavalry battle Swedes had suffered heavy losses. Bauska February 18, 1626 I read about this in the book Sikora but I do not know more details except that the Poles won. Kieżmark 1 on June 2, 1627 Gdansk infantry and mercenaries repulse Swedes led by Gustavus Adolphus. Swedish attack broke down when Gustavus was wounded and Swedes withdrew. Overall, I know very little about these battle only what I read in books. It is possible that Barkman use of Polish sources, I do not exclude that, but surely benefited from Swedish sources.

Wallhof, As far as 2,000 may be the correct number, it does not fit 4,000 to Polish sources.Kcdlp (talk) 16:20, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I say that the hussars were invincible? Where? Yes Swedish national regiments were weak under Kircholm, but you can not say the same about mercenaries. At the end of the mercenaries have experience in fighting in contrast to the peasants who were in the Swedish national regiments. In Battle of Daugavgriva (1609) Swedes had also a lot of mercenaries the same in Parnu 1609 and Weissenstein 1604. "later on the Swedes had better armor where of the hussar lance barely could penetrate" Well, Swedes had the thickest armor in Europe? What is the difference between German reiter armor from Swedish? Hussars fought often with reiter and cuirassier and eastern cavalry and most often winning. Hussars not always had lances but also won.

The cities just surrender to the Swedes without a fight. According to Polish sources, the Swedes did not go out into the field and avoid battles, such as Grudziądz 1628.

So you think that the battle should be described with one side? Polish sources are more reliable in a matter of Polish losses. You changed Swedish losses in the Battle of Trzciana (on losses that give Swedish sources) and somehow I'm not saying that the Swedish source is not reliable, and you are trying to undermine the Polish losses in the Battle of Gniezno which give Polish sources. Writing about Wenden I wanted to show that the description of the battle is the difference. Did I wrote about the fact that Swedes were not happy with the Battle of Gniew? I wrote about the Battle of Gniezno no Gniew. Swedes not forced Poles to cancel siege of Gniew.

Polish sources just do not say anything about the losses in Battle of Nowy Dwór Mazowiecki, Poles lost because the Swedish cavalry came to the back of the Poles and not by artillery fire. Under Nowy Dwór Mazowiecki there were only pospolite ruszenie not regular army. Losses in those years, from the fire Musketeers were negligible. As I've written before Polish sources are more reliable than the Swedish as to a matter of Polish losses.

Smaller skirmishes I did not mention. I gave these battle to show that the hussars won with Swedish cavalry.

Wallhof, in the same way, I can inflate the number of Swedish troops in this battle because some Polish sources give different size Swedish troops.Kcdlp (talk) 19:36, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I found the information how many Swedes had pikemen and musketeers according to Barkman: 3,862 pikemen and 4,352 musketeers. Do you have any source about the problems hussars in breaking reiters armor? Swedish reiter armor differed from the German or French? Hussars lance pierced the armor reiter or cuirassier.

Can you tell me where he give Swedish losses under Kircholm? I can say the same about Wallhof, Swedish sources are not reliable to Polish losses. 200 killed in Trzciana?here Swedish sources give:

killed and died/the sick, the wounded and deprived of horses

Baudissin: 47/253

Ekholt: 4/173

Wrangel: 7/65

Pauli: 43 /27

Anrep: 33/ 69

Rheingraf: 299/198

Hünicken: 18/73

Cuirassiers guard: 22/40

Strieff: 6/154

these losses should be added 50-60 killed Musketeers

So I have to take the source to be 100% reliable? If yes, you should take a source of Polish that is censuses of the Lithuanian army in November 1625 which says that the whole Lithuanian army had 4,000 troops. You think these sources are reliable or not?

here the same guy writes about the Lithuanian losses under Wallhof "i ok. 500-600 zabitych" that is 500-600 killed.

Yes I saw your changes in the "Battle of Kłecko" I meant the sentence: "Gniezno 1656, in Swedish sources this battle lasted for 4 hours, quite an impressive result only losing 70 men dead and wounded against 500 killed, while fighting in 4 hours and still not being the victor."

Battle of Wenden (Drobbusch) in 1626

Battle of Nowy Dwór Mazowiecki, Do not write that these sources are not reliable, but we know the losses from one side only. Polish sources say that it is not by artillery the Poles lost. Only by the Swedish cavalry which came on the back of Poles. About "but concentrated musket fire was devestating" Do you have any sources that would have confirmed? (best from hand with was fired by the musketeers) I know of an interesting source for the Battle of Fraustadt, which deny what you write about devestating musket fire.

I do not know all Polish sources to Battle of Wallhof, Sikora give 4,900 Swedes [5] and most of the Polish historians give 4,900 Swedish troops. Here you have a Swedish army under Wallhof (according to Daniel Staberg):

Infantry:

Hovregementet, Frans Bernhard von Thurn: 683 men

Bla regementet, Maximilian Teuffel: 643 men

Röda regementet, Kasper Sigismund von Plato: 661 men

Skwadron Reutera: 400 musketeers (native Swedes)

only 800 musketeers took part in the battle

Cavalry (24 squadrons):

8 squadrons Swedes Landsryttare:

(surname squadron commanders)

Lars Larsson

Hans Rotkirch

Erik Soop

Isak Axelsson

Nils Asserson

Karl Jönsson

Lorens Wagner

Bernhard Rehbinder

12 squadrons Finnish Landsryttare:

(surname squadron commanders, * indicates that the captain is not commanded in the field)

Job Bengtsson*

Anders Pauls

Reinhold Anrep

Fabian Wrangel

Gustav Horn

Reinhold Wunsch

Klas Bertilsson

Gerhard Skytte

Johan Rams *

Henrik von Hoven

Jakob Bengtsson

Lars Lindelöf *

4 squadrons Värvade Ryttare (mercenaries cavalry):

Livfanan (The Royal Guard) , Jürgen Aderkas

Fältmarskalkens (Guard Field Marshal), Klas Didrik [Sperreuter]

Magnus von der Pahlen (Livonian - Livonia cuirassiers)

Marten von Ahnen (Germans?)

Together from 1500 to 2000 cavalry, of 24 companies 18 took part in the battle.

I'm not saying that you want to overstate number of enemy troops. I mean it "I'll still suggest we put a 2,000-4,000 mark on the battle as it then neutrals the article" Both the 4,000 Lithuanians and more than 4,900 Swedes (I do not know if at all these 4,900 in sources) is not supported by the sources. So if a Polish book is written about 7,000 Swedes, for the neutrality of the article we give 4,900-7,000 Swedes? I think it is unnecessary, and we should be based on sources.Kcdlp (talk) 00:46, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also, it seems to me that the 9,000 killed Swedes is overstated. Barkman give from 7,600 to 8,000 killed and it seems to me a more reliable source than what give 9,000 killed. About the 500 captured I have no idea whether Polish sources about this say. I'd have to look in the books but I'll do it later.

Thanks for the links. Hussars often fought against western type of cavalry (heavily armored). For example against the Austrians under Byczyna, Germans in Lubieszów or with the reformed (of the western type) Russian army Połonka. Hussars also break the pikemen, can be done in four ways: push the enemy cavalry on infantry e.g. the above-mentioned Lubieszów or Kircholm, firing of muskets into enemy infantry and after that, charge e.g. Battle of Mitau August 1, 1622, third method was to attack the pikemen-musketeers formation, before pikemen go to the front e.g. Połonka or under Moscow March 30, 1611 (charge there in the snow) and the fourth method is directly charge on the infantry (thanks to its long lance) e.g. Battle of Domany February 22, 1655, or Lubar September 26, 1660.

Here you have a Swedish losses in Trzciana by Polish and German sources (There is also a letter of Gustav).

• Koniecpolski letter June 28, 1629 do not give the exact number of killed but said 100 captives (only Poles) and by 10 guns and 10 banners
• Jan Zawadzki, the Commissioner for Imperial army: more than 500 killed, 100 captured (only Poles), 10 guns and 10 banners
• Koniecpolski again June 29, 1629: 150 killed (only under Honigfelde) many more in the rest of places, 300 captured (Poles captured 100 and Austrians 200),10 guns and 10 banners
• anonymous source: 1,467 killed
• Hans Georg von Arnim-Boitzenburg letter: many killed, 300 captured, 10 guns and 11 banners
• Chemnitza letter: 500 killed, 200 captured, 10 guns
• Gustav letter: 200 killed
• Swedish army census: 479 killed/died of wounds, 1052 wounded /sick /without horses
• Paweł Piasecki: 200 captured, 15 banners and 10 guns

Daniel Staberg wrong there, these 50-60 musketeers were killed. With that I know these musketeers secured the guns which Poles and Austrians captured. This guy what did this have Swedish sources from Daniel Staberg, and give that these 50-60 Musketeers were killed. But it is worth ask about it Daniel.

Most sources give under Trzciana 500 killed and 200 captives. Losses given by Gustav are the lowest and coincide with the number of captured.

Wallhof, but Swedish sources also say that the Lithuanians were more than 2,000 troops but this do not have confirmed in Polish sources. Older Polish books gave Swedes 14.000 in Kircholm now give 11,000 (benefit from Swedish sources).

Nowy Dwór Mazowiecki, I read the description of the battle (Polish source) and emphasizes the decisive role of the Swedish cavalry. I wrote about the losses only that are known on the one hand.

Yes, I know what it Swedish salvo, losses from fire muskets were small even with Swedish salvo (I lean on sources) salvo was doing a greater psychological effect. Fraustadt, from what I remember certainly Saxon sources but probably also I have a Russian sources. I'll find them later.

Wallhof, "So if a Polish book is written about 7,000 Swedes" I gave this as an example, I do not know whether any book give this number. More than 2,000 Lithuanians give only Swedish source. Census of the Lithuanian troops is a more reliable source. Swedish sources can give the size of the Lithuanian army including with the camp followers. How from the army which had 4,000 in November and has been split into two parts Sapieha could have 4,000 troops in Wallhof?Kcdlp (talk) 04:31, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fraustadt, I was wrong this is Swedish source (probably Kampenhausen): More than 2,000 Russians fired at Närke-Värmland regiment (shot from 12 meters and Russian have flintlock mechanism), Swedish losses 2 officers wounded, 6-8 killed soldiers and less than 20 wounded soldiers. Whereas Johann Matthias von der Schulenburg said that the Swedish salvo in Battle of Fraustadt were very ineffective and inflicted little losses. He also spoke about the Battle of Klissow according to him, Swedish salvo gave losses of 12-14 killed and wounded (infantry losses, cavalry losses were to be smaller). This confirms the small effectiveness of firearms. Peter Englund in the book "Poltava" write that Charles XII tried to limit fire from artillery to a minimum to get decisive result by direct attack. Write also that the soldiers did not try to aim. Firearms produced do not care about its accuracy.

Western European countries also had cavalry who used lances. e.g. Spanish cavalry in XVI century, they fought in the Netherlands but they were poorly trained. Hussars was expensive because, hussar horses were very strong, fast, agile and consequently very expensive, hussar armor was not expensive but the Poles considered themselves Sarmatians and therefore armor decorated with gold and gemstones for splendor, which significantly increased the cost of the hussar but it is worth mentioning that hussars themselves bought their equipment and horses. Napoleon introduced to his army lancers because in the French army was then a lot of Poles e.g. Vistula Lancers in Albuera or at Waterloo, Polish-French lancers defeated the English heavy cavalry. Lancers showed a high efficiency. In the West Europe fell training Lancers and therefore not used these units not because they were expensive.

Barkman claim 7,600 to 8,000 killed. Yes farmers killed some Swedish soldiers. Document written by the Riga authorities give 8919 Swedes burial, this number includes surely camp followers. You had contact with Daniel Staberg about first Battle of Tver and these 50-60 musketeers under Trzciana.

Wallhof, order of battle will be hard to find, I know that the Swedes give: 14 hussars squadrons, 4 cossack style cavalry squadrons, 2 unidentified, 6 German infantry regiment, 3 Hungarian infantry regiment. According to this Lithuanian census Sapieha did not have German infantry and had less than 14 squadrons of hussars. Yes this census have detailed list of troops, only I do not have access to it. Sapieha said that before the battle had 1,500 troops and this census from November is confirmed that he could have 1,500-2,000 troops. Yes, Daniel gave that of these 2,387 infantry only 800 took part in the battle and of 24 squadrons cavalry, 18 took part in the battle, and 6 guns (4 6-pounder and 2 1-pounder).Kcdlp (talk) 20:20, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fraustadt, according to this source, all (2,000) the Russians had fired at the same time, that is, it was a battalions salvo. For a shot from 12 meters, those Russians had a small effectiveness. I have not met yet with a high efficiency of firearms in battles, the weapons tests results firepower were impressive but in battle it looked completely different. All in all, I also not studied this battle, I only know the source. Johann Matthias von der Schulenburg had some remark to the Swedish infantry under Klissow. The level of the Swedish infantry seemed to him an not impressive. According to him, Swedes were lined up too wide. Under Fraustadt said only that the Swedish musketeers inflicted small losses Saxons. For me to win a decisive influence in these battles had Swedish pikemen, many countries then already did not have pikemen and it was the Swedish advantage, Russians only after a few years of the Great Northern War created several units of pikemen. The fire of muskets had while a big psychological effect, but do not give big losses.

I forgot about lance, yes it was very expensive because significantly different from the normal lance, primarily method of made lance. I once read a diary of a Polish nobleman who was for some time in the Netherlands in the XVI century he was there at the tournament he did not take part in it, but he wrote that the participants of the tournament presents a very low level in the use of the lance. Yes, the culture was also very important.

Wallhof, rather Polish/Lithuanian sources say about 500-600 killed, but I know that Gustav wrote in a list about 600 killed. It would be worthwhile to ask Daniel about the source to be able to quote. Górzno, About 4,000 if I'm not mistaken Koniecpolski said at the Sejm.

Torchok, I look for Polish sources for this battle, if I remember, recently I came across some source.Kcdlp (talk) 01:42, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Simply what I mean is that firearms did not give his opponent a large losses. The same salvo was not enough to break the enemy (although there were such cases, but it was the result of a poor level of morale). However, a very strong influence on the psyche of the opponent and significantly decreased his morale.

here you have the hussars formations. Hussars charge started at a slow pace and in a relatively loose formation. The formation gradually gathered pace and closed ranks while approaching the enemy, and reached its highest pace and closest formation (knee to knee) immediately before engagement. Hussars usually charge in 3 rows (but there is also that in 5 rows). Hussars horses, were mixing old Polish horses blood with eastern horses, usually from Tatar, Turkmen, Persian and Turkish tribes. Hussars since childhood trained the use of lance and horseback riding, unfortunately, at the turn of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the nobility ceased training. Horses were trained for several years also were habituated them to the sound of of firearms, to not startle.

Pancerni and Petyhorcy were used in battles to support charge hussars (shooting from a firearm or charge). They, also charge like hussars, but only in 2 rows. Able during the charge loosen chic or closest.

Cossack cavalry, predecessor Pancerni and Petyhorcy also used in battles to support charge hussars. Fought like Pancerni and Petyhorcy.

Light cavalry:Lisowczycy, Tartar cavalry, Wallachia cavalry, all fought in a loose formation, such as the Crimean Tatars.

Best would be if, Daniel gave the source from which it takes the information about Górzno and Wallhof. I do not know how many Poles took part in the Battle of Kircholm, but certainly there were some Polish troops because, in the period from January 1605 to March 1606, Lithuanian State Treasury received and spend for army in Livonia 127 770 złotych and Crown (Polish) state treasure 223 193 złotych. That is, the army was mostly paid for by the Poles. However, I do not know how many were recruited in Poland, surely there were more Lithuanians in this battle. Yes, can be changed Swedes casualties in Kircholm.Kcdlp (talk) 17:23, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for information. Whether the article Daniel will be in English or Swedish?

Kircholm, I think it should be "7,600-8,000 killed or missing"Kcdlp (talk) 23:05, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Barkman "Kungl. Svea Livgardes Historia, bd. II: 1560-1611"

Górzno, In total, I do not know, which Polish source give 3,000 casualties. here is written about the Battle of Górzno but this is not too much. There is Swedish order of battle, is also written of Swedish source about which Daniel wrote. Is a little different course of fighting by Polish and Swedish sources. It is also about size of the Polish Army. Koniecpolski in sejm said that in Royal Prussia is 5.000 Polish troops (earlier I was wrong, because I spoke about 4,000 troops in Royal Prussia). Most of these troops (about 4,000) besieged Brodnica (Strasburg), but it is not known whether during the battle participated these 4,000 troops because Polish source says that, the Poles were scattered around the area and part of troops did not manage to get to the battlefield and strength of Poles are rated at 2,000-3,000 troops. Polish estimates of losses, I look for in the afternoon.Kcdlp (talk) 01:41, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

About losses: 83 cavalry killed, 300-500 German infantry killed or captured and 200 Hungarian infantry killed or captured.Kcdlp (talk) 14:36, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hungarian infantry (style of Hungarian infantry) they were mostly Poles. Thanks for the links. In tests the firearm had a very long range, but I have not met with such effectiveness on the battlefield. I know a lot of sources that show large ineffectiveness of a firearm, and I will remain with the claim that firearms were mainly affect the morale of the enemy.Kcdlp (talk) 18:31, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot the source: "Kronika Pawła Piaseckiego biskupa przemyślskiego. Polski przekład wedle dawnego rękopismu, poprzedzony studyjum krytyczném nad życiem i pismami autora" that is Piasecki chronicles and "Pamiętniki do panowania Zygmunta III, Władysława IV i Jana Kazimierza T.1" that is anonymous Diary.Kcdlp (talk) 18:39, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

At that time, Poland had only a Field Crown Hetman (Stanisław Koniecpolski) while the Great Crown Hetman position was vacant. In this battle, nominally commanded by the King, but if I'm not mistaken was a council of war, which includes the King. Koniecpolski was then still in the Ukraine, and therefore the king commanded.Kcdlp (talk) 23:07, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know in which book, Poles give 3,000 losses? Because I know only two Polish sources which give losses (Piasecki chronicles and anonymous diary), and as far as I know these are the only Polish sources which give losses, and that is why I would like to check in this books, from what source these historians benefited. When the Poles set fire to the village of Zaborowo, Hussars attacked Teuffel forces (300 soldiers of ‘yellow’ regiment värvade and 100 soldiers of ‘blue’ regiment värvade) Poles defeated them but they were attacked by cavalry Hans Wrangel and Streiff.Kcdlp (talk) 02:53, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Piasecki give 83 cavalry killed, 500 German infantry killed or captured, 200 Hungarian infantry killed or captured.

anonymous diary give 83 cavalry killed, 300 German infantry killed or captured, 200 Hungarian infantry killed or captured.

Piasecki is a more reliable source than an anonymous diary, because it was at that time secretary of the King and he had access to the battle reports and had a brother, who took part in this battle. His description of the battle comes from these reports, and probably from his brother.

From what I read here in post #2, Swedish sources say that the Poles broke the Swedish first line and they went on their rear.

Polish sources say that Swedish infantry was repelled and hussars charge on this infantry was successful.Kcdlp (talk) 17:34, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have a question about Battle of Wenden (1578). You gave strength and losses, which are in Infobox. With what sources you used?Kcdlp (talk) 14:59, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is a magazine (in Polish) in which is described the Battle of Wenden (according to Polish and Swedish sources). In the battle participated 2,000 Poles and 2,000-2,300 Swedes (is written there that the number of Swedes comes from a Swedish source but it does not say from which). While the Russians participated from 18,000 to 22,000.

As for the losses:

6,000 killed Russians and 100 killed Poles and Swedes (according to Gustav Petri Kungl. Första livgrenadjärregementets historia I, Stockholm 1926)

6,280 killed, 3,000 captured and 1,720 dispersed Russians. 200 killed Swedes, 100 killed Riga soldiers, 60 killed "hovfolk" (probably a Livonia nobility) and a few Poles (according to Jonas Hedberg, Kungl. Artilleriet - Medeltid och Vasatid, Stockholm 1975 - Most likely on the basis of a letter John III Vasa to Holstein Duke Magnus)

As for the losses the Russian artillery:

6 large mortars and 14 large cannons (according to Hedberg)

23-30 cannons (according to Polish sources)Kcdlp (talk) 16:02, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, we give Hedberg's accounts. Yes, Poles count the cannons as "cannons and mortars". Two Polish sources say of 23 cannons and one say about 30. Hedberg rather, wrote about the whole the captured Russian artillery because Hedberg wrote about a quarrel between the Poles and Swedes about cannons which was after the battle. Swedes had to get cannons but during the transport of cannons to the Swedish camp, Poles took them and did not want to give them back. So we give the number of Russian troops 18,000-22,000 men. What about the allies troops? leave it as is, or change at 4,000-4,300 men?Kcdlp (talk) 18:51, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

According to this magazine Russian army was commanded by voivods: Piotr Tatow, Wasili Woroncow, Piotr Choroszczyn and Andrij Szokłanow (The first two had the command of the artillery and probably infantry, the other two commanded the cavalry). According to Polish sources in the Russian army was a total of eight voivods (three were killed, two were captured and three escaped).

Polish sources estimate the allied troops for 3,500 Swedes and 2,000 Poles. However, Daniel Staberg found a Swedish sources which says about 2,000-2,300 Swedish troops (1,300-1,500 infantry and 700-800 cavalry).Kcdlp (talk) 19:43, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, in these battles were only the Saxon troops.Kcdlp (talk) 19:22, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I saw your edits in battles of Prostki, Gołąb and Filipów, what sources you used? Whether these sources give the course of these battles? and strength or losses of Poles?Kcdlp (talk) 17:16, 06 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for my late respond. Today I looked through the book Prostki 1656 (which is in references). Book is based on Polish and Brandenburgers sources. According to sources in this book, strength of both sides were less as those given in the wikipedia (while the Swedes were more than 800 men). I will write about it tomorrow.Kcdlp (talk) 22:08, 07 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

According to the book "Prostki 1656" in this battle was little more than a 4,000 Swedish-Brandenburg troops (about 2,000 Swedes and 2,000 Brandenburgers) Bogusław Radziwiłł led the Swedes, while Georg Friedrich of Waldeck commanded entire Swedish-Brandenburg troops. Lithuanian-Polish-Tartar troops numbered about 8,000 was also a Pospolite ruszenie (rather, did not participate in the battle). As for the losses they are given only the Swedes 1,500 killed and captured, while losses of Brandenburg were smaller because they fled from the battlefield. Polish losses are referred to as "small".Kcdlp (talk) 13:25, 08 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

According to Waldeck Swedes had 6 regiments (Wojniłłowicz, Kochowski, Rudawski and Des Noyers say the same thing).

Johann Engel regiment

Joachim Engel regiment

Johann Jacob Taubeg regiment

Israel Ridderhielm regiment

Per Hammarskjold regiment

Puttkamer regiment

3 regiments (Johann Engel, Joachim Engel and Riderhielm) had 1,050 men. A total of 6 regiments had 2,000 men.

Brandenburgians had from 7 to 10 regiments, surely were:

Leibregiment

Georg Friedrich of Waldeck regiment

Johann Georg zu Sachsen-Weimar regiment

Christoph von Kannenberg regiment

Wolf Ernst von Eller regiment

Christoph de Briinell skwadron

6 dragons companies under the command Hohendorf

Swedish-Brandenburg troops had 9 artillery pieces.Kcdlp (talk) 21:06, 08 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, in the book "Fenomen Husarii" on page 13-14, Sikora estimates Swedish strength to about 11,000 men and losses on 6000-9000 men. In a footnote he give Henryk Wisner "Kircholm 1605". I do not know if he wrote something in his books about Chojnice but here in this forum estimates Swedish strength on 1,500 men according to Patrick Gordon or 8 regiments of reiters according to des Noyers. Polish strength 200 men Wiśniowiecki according to Łoś and 1,200 men Czarniecki according to Kochowski. The whole of Polish forces in the region of Chojnice is a few thousand men but only some of them fought in this battle. Whereas the losses such as are here Chojnice (Polish accounts). As for the Polish forces in the Great Northern War, I have to look for information in books. I have a book Wimmer about Great Northern War and I check if something writes about it. About civil war in Poland 1704-1709 I have very few information. Where you found the information about the Battle of Drohobych 1709? Kcdlp (talk) 17:18, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

These 50,000 Poles and 30,000 Saxons, this is troops at the beginning of the war? According to the book Jan Wimmer "Wojsko Rzeczypospolitej w dobie wojny północnej" the Crown army (according to the resolutions Warsaw council in 1710) was to be 42,279 men (together with the officers and craftsmen) and Lithuanian army 18,200 men (without officers and craftsmen) that is, the whole Polish-Lithuanian army counts about 60,000 men. But this is only on paper strength, for example Lithuanians they had have the 8,600 infantry and 4,000 dragoons but Krzysztof Zawisza said that there were only 3,000 men. According to this book the Crown army succeeded in establishing 12,000 cavalry (in fact, there were fewer soldiers) and a small number of infantry. About Lachowce and Podkamień I heard, (if I remember correctly, in Podkamień Sapieha defeated the Russians and under Lachowce he defeated Ogiński) whereas about Drohobycz I know nothing. You can write something more about this battle?Kcdlp (talk) 14:56, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

According to book "Wojsko Rzeczypospolitej w dobie wojny północnej" Poles at the beginning of the war (in 1702) pay wages for 17,500 Crown troops (7,510 infantry, 2,500 dragoons, 1,510 hussars, 900 harquebusiers, 4,370 pancerni, 710 light cavalry). 25% of this amount went to the commanders, ie should be 13,125 men in Crown army but condition in the regiments were very low (were banners where it was only 20% men of these units but were rare). Under Kliszów, Lubomirski had 5,900-6,200 cavalry (paper strength) but in fact the size of these troops was less, about more than half. So Lubomirski had 3,000 men (cavalry with infantry), volunteers and pospolite ruszenie was about 1,000 men that is together could have up to 4,000 men. About Podkamień, I found a fragment of Sapieha relation (I do not know if this is a description of the whole battle), where the Russian cavalry shooting at Lithuanians, Lithuanians withstood and charge on the Russians, Russians were breaking down and began to flee to the forest were pursued by Lithuanians, according to Sapieha, Russians losses amounted to several hundred killed. In total, for the Poles better that the Russians won in Poltava, because there were no territorial losses and Livonia (and perhaps Estonia) was to be incorporated into Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth but conspiracies Augustus II against Tsar prevented this. And Poland also was independent to 1717 when was Silent Sejm. By the way, Swedish army was decimated diseases, had no supplies and arrival of Lewenhaupt troops more worsened the situation of the Swedish army, if there were no such problems Swedes would probably have won at Poltava. Here it is this book Peter From "Katastrofen vid Poltava" edition in the Polish language. I buy it, but is now not available.Kcdlp (talk) 16:11, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Polish army had low morale, nobility discontinue training and paid other people to replace them in the army. Also Lubomirski behavior during the battle of Kliszów and after the battle when the Polish raids captured several hundred of Swedes and Lubomirski released them, have an impact on the morale of soldiers. Poles also lacked a good commander. Lubomirski was a good commander but he betrayed, Marcin Kątski was a very good artillery commander but he was too old and battle of Kliszów was his last battle, Jakub Zygmunt Rybiński was a very good cavalry commander (according to Wimmer it one of the best cavalry commanders in the Great Northern War and in this group was the only Pole) but each of his initiative was blocked by Sieniawski. I think it's good that the Swedes resigned with pistols in the cavalry, charge on melee weapons was much more effective, whereas hussars did not always have a lance. Surely troops under Kliszów were less numerous, these which give Infobox, Sikora writes about Kungl. Maij:ts Lifregemente Dragoner (I do not know whether I good wrote) should have 600 men and in fact had from 393 to 437 men (able to fighting and sick). According to this fragment Sapieha won, but I'm not sure if it is the whole description of this battle and I'll try to find something more. Yes, Russia had an impact on Polish politics but after 1717, in 1709 no one knew how to things will turn. At the beginning of the war Saxon-Polish side was dominant in alliance with Russia, Poles in return for their participation in the war wanted the return of Kiev and probably Smolensk. After Pruth campaign I think the Ottomans could force more concessions from Russia.Kcdlp (talk) 22:19, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lubomirski change the side In 1704 (returned to the supporters of Augustus II in the same year or in 1705 I do not remember exactly) but after the battle of Kliszów, Poles accused him of selling battle. What breed were horses, on which the Swedes ridden during the Great Northern War? Poland and Saxony did not gain any territories because after Silent Sejm, Augustus wanted to withdraw the Russian army from Poland, and began to conspire against Peter I, George I had a great plan for war with Russia, coalition was composed of Hesse-Kassel, Prussia, Saxony, Hanover (supported by the Great Britain) , Sweden and Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Russians are fearing war and withdrew from the Poland, Polish nobility after the withdrawal of the Russians decided that the next war is not necessary. British diplomacy also disappoint, only held talks with King and with the nobility do not. Signed Treaty of Vienna from January 1, 1719 but unfortunately there was no war. Saxons withdrew from the war because was established Tarnogród Confederation, Saxon troops marched into Poland and began fighting with Poles, eventually the war was inconclusive, Peter I was a mediator in talks Polish-Saxon and the effect of this mediation was Silent Sejm. In 1712 supporters of Leszczyński were defeated by supporters of Augustus in battle of Krotoszyn. Probably the fighting supporters Leszczyński and Augustus lasted to 1713. Ottoman troops stood near Khotyn (I do not remember exactly when but probably in 1713) but Ottomans did not fight and ended up on some treaties. Charles could return to Sweden after Pruth Campaign.Kcdlp (talk) 20:39, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Poles used the "Polish horse". Unfortunately this breed a horse already extinct. This horse was a hybrid wild Tarpan and of “eastern horses” (Turkmen, Turkish etc.). As a result, was made the type of horse which perfectly combined in itself conflicting against each other qualities - iron health, stamina, agility, speed and very good utilize fodder (these horses were able to eat the bark of trees, without any impact on health and qualities). In the event of war, a grand coalition with Russia, Poland had recover the lost territories in 1667 and maintain authority over the Courland. What is interesting in 1715, Augustus II tried to convince George I to attack on Denmark (because, he knew that the negotiations with the Tsar can achieve nothing and therefore tried to eliminate rival to share the booty). And another thing, to a Poland arrived diplomat of George I, James Scott with instruction for mediation between Poland and Sweden and according to book ” Wielka Historia Polski. Tom 5. 1696-1815” signed a truce which formally ended the war between the Poland and Sweden. Do you know something might about this truce?Kcdlp (talk) 14:10, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Augustus probably wanted to gain territories in Germany, because the Russians occupied Livonia and Augustus suspected that they do not want implementation of the agreement and still they did not want to withdraw his army from Poland. Perhaps he hoped to gain Swedish Pomerania but Prussia received part of its. Have you heard about battle of Hel in October 1606? It was a naval battle between Poles commanded by Jan Weycher and Swedes commanded by Jacob Gotberg. Swedes had 19 ships and Poles had 11 or 12 ships supported by artillery on land. Poles have won but the battle was short and unless there were no large losses. You know whether any Swedish source says something about this battle?Kcdlp (talk) 13:08, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know, how this battle is named in Sweden. Here in last post on this page is written "Jakub Gotberg" the first name is Polonized but the surname should be correct.Kcdlp (talk) 14:46, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, recently I read about preparation of Lithuanians for war with Sweden in 1635 (in book Z dziejow stosunkow RON ze Szwecja w XVII wieku, article: Andrzej Rachuba-Litewskie przygotowania do wojny ze Szwecja w 1635 roku) and wrote there that Radziwiłł between 23-26 August, crossed the Daugava River, thereby starting the "war". Treaty of Stuhmsdorf signed on 12 September and quickly the war is over, but I'm interested in the Lithuanian actions in Swedish Livonia (I am curious, whether there has been to some skirmish). Do you know anything about this? Kcdlp (talk) 16:23, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but the failure of negotiations in Brodnica, which resulted in the dehiscence of commissioners in 24 July, king urged Radziwiłł's to offensive action. Radziwiłł, moreover, did not believe in the possibility of concluding a treaty and developed a attack plan on Swedish Livonia from two sides, from the territory of Courland and from Dyneburg (Daugavpils). Lithuanians have built bridges across the Daugava River, to good communication with the country and supply additions, in August Radziwiłł published the military articles, regulate all matters related with discipline, order and security in the camp. After crossing the Daugava, Lithuanians formed a fortified camp and preparing to the siege castles, bring the heaviest cannons Kcdlp (talk) 18:04, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, have you read something about the Polish-Swedish battles during the First Northern War? Kcdlp (talk) 14:52, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would be very happy if you translate it. In the book "Wojny i wojskowość polska w XVI wieku Tom II" is a brief description of this war, during this war was six battles and skirmishes, six times Pärnu was besieged, twice Reval and Lode. There were also some actions at sea (mainly privateer). Unfortunately survived few sources describing this war. Kcdlp (talk) 20:24, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! From what I see the difference is only on the date of battle of Runafer (according to the book "Wojny i wojskowość polska w XVI wieku tom II" battle took place in 2 February 1567). Kcdlp (talk) 15:11, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! In Sikora doctoral dissertation, date of the battle is May 24, 1709. There is only, quoted the relation of participant in the battle of clashes with the dragoons, and according to this source several hundred Russians were killed. Have you heard about battle of Praga which took place in October 25, 1705. Swedish and Leszczyński supporters troops were defeated by Augustus supporters, Russians and Saxons. Losses for the Swedish-Leszczyński side had been estimated at 1,000 men and 6 guns, while the Swedes only with the greatest difficulty they had to keep the bridge over the Vistula. Kcdlp (talk) 23:10, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know what were the strength of both sides, Augustus supporters was under the command of Michał Serwacy Wiśniowiecki and Sienicki, Russians commanded by Aleksandr Menshikov, I do not know who commanded the Saxon cavalry. Leszczyński army is Potocki and Sapieha troops, I do not know who commanded. And I do not know who commanded the Swedes. I do not have the description of the battle but Swedes and the Leszczynski troops were attacked by surprise, part of the troops was killed and part fled. Sienicki tried to gain the bridge and destroy it, Swedes managed to keep the bridge but with heavy losses. Losses of Augustus-Russians-Saxon troops were to be four times smaller than Swedish-Leszczyński. Information about this battle I have with book Jan Wimmer "Wojsko Rzeczypospolitej w dobie Wojny Północnej 1700-1717". Kcdlp (talk) 14:31, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wimmer give in footnotes four source for this battle (Nordberg, Zawisza, Rakowski and Adlerfelt) maybe they write something more about this. At that time in Warsaw was the diet deliberations and therefore, there came the pro-Swedish troops, which were to be in Praga. Attempting to capture the bridge could be after the battle, because Wimmer writes about this attempt after Leszczyński-Swedish troops were to be defeated. In this book is a short described of Lubomirski raid which took place after the battle of Klissow. If you want I can write about it.Kcdlp (talk) 21:04, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If Stanisław foot guard was destroyed, rather it was not too large struggle, because of these 1,500 Stanisław troops, 17 banners was light cavalry and 8 banners not known. Therefore the losses had to be smaller as those 1,000 killed about which I wrote earlier.

Is very difficult to indicate the bloodiest battle, therefore, I will indicate a few. In the twentieth century was Battle of Warsaw (1920). In the nineteenth century was Battle of Olszynka Grochowska and Battle of Warsaw (1831). In seventeenth century was the Battle of Chocim 1621, losses on both sides were higher from those given in infobox, for example, the English ambassador in Constantinople wrote about the 80,000 dead Turks and more than 100,000 horses. In the sixteenth century Battle of Orsha but here most of the losses suffered Russians. In the fifteenth century Battle of Grunwald and Battle of Varna. Usually it one of the side suffered the heaviest losses, therefore difficult to identify which battle will for both sides of the bloody and in the history of Sweden, which battles was the bloodiest?

Lubomirski raid: Polish troops (composed of light cavalry, pancerni and dragoons) started from the camp under Koprzywnica. At the head of this troops was Jerzy Aleksander Lubomirski and general Brandt. September 11, Lubomirski at the head of 24 banners attacked Sparre troops and forced them to retreat. September 13, Brandt attacked the Gyllenkrook and Kreutz corps who had been sent by Charles XII to bring the wounded from Pińczów, part of this corps suffered heavy losses and retreated to Opatowiec. Lubomirski after the victorious action against the Sparre, moved north and reached up to Lidzbark Welski where he attacked 1,500 Swedes and defeated them. Lubomirski going back to camp under Koprzywnica attacked 300 Swedes who were sent to Żarnowiec and captured them. Then attacked Piotrków where they were Swedes, where break and captured 1,800 Swedes of colonel Horn. Lubomirski returned to the camp with over 2,000 captives.Kcdlp (talk) 13:55, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know anything more about the skirmish under Żarnowiec, here in post number 59, Sikora writes that the Swedes were 500 men in Piotrków. As for the captives, I remember that I read somewhere on some forum where Sikora wrote that, according to Swedish sources, Poles captured several hundred Swedes. These captives were freed by Hieronim Lubomirski because he wanted to avoid plunder his property and probably even then conspired with the Swedes. Most probable under Grunwald, Poles and allies had about 30,000 men and Teutonic Order about 15,000 men. Losses are difficult to estimate but the Teutonic Order suffered a much greater losses, with 250 brothers of the Order was to be 203 killed, only 1,427 Teutonic Knights back to Malbork. Poles captured 51 standards that is, all what Teutonic Order had. Is it true that the Danes used still caracole tactic in battle of Lund? And what is the greatest victory of Sweden, ie. where suffered the smallest losses and the enemy suffered the greatest losses. Will it be Narva? Kcdlp (talk) 21:51, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know how his first name, I only know that he commanded the Swedes under Piotrków. Great strategic victories was Cedynia, Głogów, Niemcza, Khotyn and trip to forces of Tatars in 1672 where from October 5 to October 14, John Sobieski had 2,500-3,000 troops, ride more than 450 km upon a fatal road and in constant fighting, several thousand Tatars were killed and captured and freed tens of thousands of peasants. The largest winning naval battle is Vistula Lagoon. Battle in which the Poles have suffered small losses and the opponents heavy casualties is Obertyn, Lubieszów, Kircholm, Smolensk after a few month fighting with the relief forces the whole Russian army surrendered, Kumejki the largest burst of Cossack tabor made by the winged hussars, Cossacks losses are more than 7,000 killed compared to 250 killed Poles, Ochmatów with 20,000 Tatars returned only 4-5 thousand to Crimea, most of them were killed and captured after the battle in the pursuit, Chudnov, Khotyn there are other but this is the most famous victories. The biggest defeats Korsun this information here about 40,000 Tatars is definitely exaggerated, in fact, there were 7-8 thousand Tatars, were killed and wounded about 2,500 Poles rest are captives, Batoh most of soldiers were murdered after the battle, Cecora Grand Crown Hetman Stanisław Żółkiewski was killed and Field Crown Hetman Stanisław Koniecpolski was captured, Varna king Władysław III was killed, Chmielnik, Legnica, Maciejowice, Brest, Praga and Bzura. When took place battle of the Pechora in which Carl Gustaf Creutz participated, whether there Swedes fought against the Russians? and what was the outcome? Kcdlp (talk) 22:27, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Under Petschora, Swedes had ramparts or something else?

With western armies mostly fought against the Germans, most of struggle with them was from the 10th to the 15th century e.g. Płowce, Koronowo, Chojnice (here Polish troops consisted mainly of Pospolite ruszenie), Świecino. From the 16th century already fought less, Byczyna (here in the Maximilian troops were also Poles and Hungarians, it was a curious battle because on both sides were Polish and Hungarian winged hussars), during the Tarnogród Confederation fought several battles and skirmishes with Saxons (Poles won under Radogoszcza, Kraśnik, Sokal, Ryczywół, Leszno, Środa, Poznań, Poles were defeat under Sandomierz and Kowalew). Often also fought with the Czechs but during the Middle Ages, lisowczycy only had contact with the Czechs during the Thirty Years' War e.g. Battle of White Mountain (where they fought as mercenaries). Poles also fought with the Danes e.g. In 1571 Danes attacked by surprise vessels in Puck and they accomplished a victory, during the Danzig rebellion in Elbląg Polish-Hungarian infantry defeated the Danes, during the Thirty Years' War lisowczycy fought several times with the Danes e.g. Granowo where the Imperial army gained a victory (lisowczycy were in the Imperial army), whereas before this battle were three skirmishes where lisowczycy defeated the Danes.

I also think that the Deluge and the Great Northern War are very interesting conflicts. Interesting is, for example, struggle in Courland during the Deluge. Kcdlp (talk) 21:27, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Courland campaign is a little known episode of the Deluge, and seems to me interesting because there was a lot of sieges and skirmishes while the major battles were very few. In August 1658, Field Marshal Robert Douglas marched from Riga at the head of about 4,500 men. At night from 9 to 10 October, Swedes gained Mitauand captured Jacob Kettler. Until April 1659, Douglas without any problems took almost the whole duchy e.g. Goldynga, Windawa, Bowsk. Lithuanians at that time fought with the Russians. Samuel Komorowski was directed to Courland. The first smaller skirmish took place on the Mūša, Lithuanians there won. Douglas after this defeat, withdrew from the Janiszki and went to Semigalia. In November 1658, several hundred of Swedes have left the Mitau castle, they were attacked in Medun Mujża by 350 Lithuanians under the command of Kazimierz Szpundrowski, Lithuanians were close to defeat but Komorowski came to the rescue and the Swedes were defeated. December 20, 1658, Sweden and Moscow signed a truce in Valiesar and Muscovite troops invaded the Lithuania. Komorowski went against the Russians (leaving in Courland, regiment of the royal guard under the command of Ernest Jan Korff), Lithuanians drove the Russians from under Čedasai, Russians took refuge in the castle and were under siege, castle was not captured but in April 25, 1659 signed a truce. In the meantime, in March 17, 1659, under Hazenpot Korff was defeated by Swedes under the command of Aderkas, Lithuanians had lost 200 men and Korff was captured. Douglas went with the army to duchy of Prussia, in order to join up with the Wirtz troops. Douglas ordered the concentration under Szkudy, supported by troops from Ingria (1,000 infantry and 200 cavalry), together had about 4,000 men. He intended to enter into Prussia passing through Samogitia. While Komorowski went from Čedasai and marched in towards Palanga. May 18, nearby Židikai Swedes arrived. Lithuanians cavalry attacked the vanguard of the Swedish troops and Swedes were forced to flee, soon came the main Swedish force and opened fire of cannons to Lithuanians, Komorowski withdrew, the battle was indecisive. In early June, Douglas withdrew from Samogitia to Windawa, and in the first days of August to Riga. Komorowski sent 2,500 cavalry under the command of Pac to Mitau and Komorowski stood under Plateliai with 1,000 men, soon reached him Brandenburg troops from Klaipėda. June 23, under Sałaty, Komorowski defeated 1,000 Swedes under the command of Aderkas, 300 Swedes were killed and 250 captured (the commander Aderkas and several other officers were captured). August 16, Komorowski reached under Goldynga defeated a small Swedish force and captured the city, taking dozens of captives and began the siege of the castle. To Komorowski arrived the Lithuanians troops under the command of Aleksander Hilary Połubiński,. September 3, Douglas came to Goldynga to the relief, Komorowski and Połubiński left under the castle Brandenburgers and went in towards of Douglas, after minor skirmishes, at night Swedes started retreat. Douglas crossed the Samogitia border but after a short time he returned to Semigalia and stood the camp under Bauska, whence he sent Swedish troops to looting Samogitia. October 21, Lithuanians under the command of Pac came under Swedish camp and attacked and defeated the Swedish vanguard under the command of Douglas. Douglas managed to jump on a horse across the ditch, then from the camp moved with the help to Douglas, a few hundred reiters, reiters was pushed back from the field but by collapsing night and without a infantry Lithuanians could not get the Swedish camp, the fight ended. The next day Douglas began retreat to Riga and the whole Swedish field army withdrew for the Daugava River. September 19, capitulated Goldynga, in September 25, Windawa and in October 18, Szkrundy. While Brandenburgians besieged and captured Liepāja and under the command of Bogusław Radziwiłł captured Grobiņa. October 20, Radziwiłł gave a banquet, after which, Komorowski died (strangled by a scarf that became entangled in the wheels of the carriage). After his death, Pac was commander of the troops. In November, began a siege Mitau, January 8, Swedes capitulated and Lithuanians entered the city the next day. December 30, sent 10 banners under Riga, skirmishes took place there which won the Lithuanians. Lithuanians failed to capture Bauska but Swedes withdrew from the city after the peace treaty. Description according to Andrzej Majewski ″Działania wojenne w Księstwie Kurlandii i Semigalii w latach 1658—1660". Kcdlp (talk) 23:45, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like that, the Swedes had a significant tactical advantage over Danes. Brandenburgians during the Scanian War were probably more demanding opponent, is not it? In total, it’s a pity that there was no Swedish-Polish alliance during this war, mainly due to Michał Kazimierz Pac there was no alliance. Kcdlp (talk) 15:42, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I once read a book about Scanian War and from what I remember there wrote that the Brandenburg army was better than Danish, so that's why I asked. I will write in short, about Swedish-Polish alliance from the Polish perspective:

After the signing of the peace treaty in 17 October 1676, with the Ottomans at Żurawno. John III Sobieski wanted to join the war with Brandenburg-Prussia and gain Duchy of Prussia (did not intend to annexation their, just give them to his son Jakub Sobieski which was in the future help him to become king of Poland, after the death of his father) relying on a secret alliance with France, signed in June 11, 1675 in Jaworowo and preliminary agreement with Sweden, signed in December 1675 with Swedish deputy Anders Liliehöök (final agreement was signed in August 4, 1677, in Gdańsk). So it was a private policy of the king and from the beginning maintained their projects in secret from the nobility, nevertheless the nobility knew about the plans of the king and was opposed to the war. Knowing that it is impossible to official declaration of war, Sobieski did not even try to use to implement their concepts of state troops. While with his own money formed private troops (from army who participated in the war with Ottomans) which according to the agreement of Gdańsk had a count of about 6,000-7,000 men. These troops quarter in Royal Prussia from where they had to attack Brandenburgers. These forces were, however, play only a supporting role, a major role allocated to the Swedish army (having to count from 8,000 to 10,000 men) who had to move from Livonia through Courland and Samogitia, to then gain Ducal Prussia and pass them to Sobieski. Planned to use the involvement Brandenburg in Swedish Pomerania and in Ducal Prussia outside the period from February to June 1678 were the lack of sufficient defense . Pulling back the forces of the Elector from Swedish Pomerania was in turn the main objective of Swedes. The success of the plan depended on weave many favorable circumstances, to march troops through the territory of the Commonwealth had to be agreed by diet. Then it was not certain whether the Swedes give Sobieski the Ducal Prussia. Already in the initial phase, a further success of the plan depended mainly on the attitude of the Lithuanian army which was under the command of Michał Kazimierz Pac which was in opposition in relation to the king, e.g. after the battle of Khotyn left the camp at the head of the majority of the Lithuanian army, what contributed to squander this victory. Contacts Pac with Brandenburgers began when Sobieski became king, in exchange for the money he had to disturb Sobieski. While Warsaw Diet in 1677, Pac suggested to attack the Swedish Livonia. Even during the session of the Diet, Pac has established close contacts with the Danish deputy, Magnus Gjøe. When Sobieski went to Gdańsk, Pac sent to Sobieski a deputy of Samogitia nobility, in order to revealed what he intends to do. Sobieski assured them it does not intend to attack Brandenburgers. However assurance of Sobieski contradicted the message from Swedish Livonia. As reported in late September, Swedish forces there numbered 5,000 men and soon expected to arrive subsequent troops. Then Pac, sent messengers to Christer Horn, appealed to the Horn to maintain peace and does not violate the borders. This caused a great astonishment at the Horn. Horn unaware the political situation in Commonwealth, revealed that has permission from Sobieski, to march troops through Courland and Samogitia. Also the attitude of Swedes contributed to failed gain of Ducal Prussia, which operated too slowly. Bengt Horn not quite that delayed the arrival to Livonia, it even squandered all the money, allocated to this campaign. His successor Christer Horn with more than 10,000 men, delayed in crossing the border because he wanted to settle the matter through diplomacy. The Swedes sent several times deputies to Pac, but did not obtain permit to march troops. Meanwhile, after the capture of Szczecin , the whole operation from a strategic point of view has lost the meaning but also the chances of success, because Brandenburg's able to refer a greater strength to defend the threatened the province. In February 12, 1678, Pac wrote in a letter to the king in which he wrote that the Swedes do not give Ducal Prussia to the Commonwealth and therefore do not want them to pass through the territory of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Sobieski ultimately abandoned Polish-Swedish alliance, but the Swedes did not resigned and finally started offensive on the Ducal Prussia. But its course you surely know. I'll just add that, after the defeat of the Swedes in February 7, 1679 in Telsze, Lithuanians took part in the the pursuit of Swedes and they took many captives who were forcibly conscripted into the Lithuanian troops, Sobieski intervened at Pac to release the Swedes. According to Konrad Bobiatyński ″Michał Kazimierz Pac a polityka bałtycka Jana III Sobieskiego″. Kcdlp (talk) 23:26, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

From what I remember, Brandenburgians have a larger army than Danes, was better trained and had greater access to recruitment mercenaries from the German states. If the Swedes began their offensive on Ducal Prussia in late 1677, probably would gain this whole area because there were no major Brandenburgers forces and the Swedes would have a considerable numerical superiority. Brandenburg would be in a difficult situation fighting on two fronts and at that time did not gain any important towns in Swedish Pomerania. Kcdlp (talk) 13:16, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, unfortunately, I haven't studied these battles, only in books I met mention, that the battle took place, who won, strength and what were the losses (strength and losses, only in the case of Praga Wimmer wrote about Praga, based on Nordberg, Adlerfelt, Rakowski and Zawisza, do you know these first two sources?). If I find something, I will inform you. With such little-known battles, I only know the exact description of the battle of Chybice June 18, 1704, from this article (what is interesting Swedes in this battle used caracol).

As for the battle of Wilno 1702, I only know that Pociej had about 3,000 men and Swedes had more troops (according to Polish sources). As for the number of killed and wounded, I have not seen any data, I only know that were lost two cannons.

Olkieniki 1706, from what I found here the battle took place February 22, the battle was rather indecisive, Ducker withstood three attacks and retreated to Olkieniki and Bauer retreated to Wilno. There is no specified strength and losses. What the Swedish sources say about this battle?

I found information about the battle of Radom/Zakrzew 1656 in book Paweł Skworoda “Warka – Gniezno 1656”. According this book Witowski had probably 4 banners of cavalry. Ascheberg had 242 men (Germans reiter). Ascheberg withstood 10 attacks, while another attack Poles managed to set fire to buildings, Ascheberg had to retreat to Radom, Poles pursuit him, but through the darkness he managed to escape, however, the Swedes suffered losses, Poles also took several captives.

Kircholm, Order of battle:

first cavalry:

left wing under the command of Tomasz Dąbrowa:

2 banners of cossacks style cavalry led by Dąbrowa – 200 men

1 banner of Mikołaj Kossakowski hussars – 100 men

1 banner of harquebusier, 3 cornets:

Walter Plettemberg with nobility of Livonia – 50 men

Gerhard Witting – 100 men

Benedykt Wall – 60 men

1 banner of Strzelecki cossack style cavalry – 100 men

2 banners of hussars led by Machowski – 200 men

1 banner of Zachar Cossack style cavalry – 100 men

center :

2 banners of hussars led by Wincenty Woyna – 300 men

2 banners of hussars led by Teodor Lacki – 200 men

2 banners of hussars – 200 men

right wing:

1 banner of Aleksander Chodkiewicz hussars – 150 men

1 banner of Szczęsny Niewiarowski hussars – 100 men

4 banners of petyhorcy led by Jan Piotr Sapieha – 400 men

1 banner of Sapieha hussars – 100 men

1 banner of Wilamowski hussars – 100 men

1 banner of Dymitr Boruchowski hussars – 100 men

1 banner of Marcin Giedroyć hussars – 100 men

3 cannons

infantry (stood on the left from Woyna regiment):

Hetman banner led by Ross – 400 men

Dzikowski – 150 men

Ludwik Gosiewski – 200 men

Niewiarowski – 160 men

Andrzej Wilczkowski – 130 men

2 cannons

at camp:

4 banners of tatars cavalry:

Bogdan – 100 men

Ibraima – 100 men

Mustafa – 50 men

Sakina – 100 men

on the other side of the river:

3 banners of Courland cavalry led by Friedrich Kettler – 300 men

You have the same? This is the paper strength, of this number must be deducted 15%. Because at that time the pay of officers was included in the units. Eg. created a new unit which has 100 men in fact, will have only 85 men. Kcdlp (talk) 03:17, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Under Chybice, Swedes were under the command of Carl Gustaf Wulfrath (500 men, 8 banners, do not know from which regiment). Carl Gustaf Rehnskiöld sent troops on scouting and in order to acquire supplies, surely Swedes mission was scouting. Poles had 3,000 men (including several hundred Saxons) under the command of Stanisław Chomętowski, 360 Swedes was killed and 30 captured, Poles had 30 killed. The day before this battle, the Poles defeated the Swedes who were under the command of Moritz, and pursuit them into the Swedish camp. The Swedes also used caracol in Obica July 16, 1702, where they were defeated.

Lautenburg, this is definitely the Lidzbark Welski, there was a battle in September 1702, which Poles won, while of this in 1703 I have not heard, you know the exact date?

Near Kraków, was the battle on September 11, 1702, Lubomirski there won.

Oder Beltsch 1704, I do not know the location of the battle, but it is known that took place near the Oder river. According to Wimmer, 1,500 Cossacks from Patkul army were surrounded and was defeated, Swedes have a numerical superiority, a second Russian army also was surrounded by the Swedes under the command of Welling in the village Tylewice (near Wschowa), Swedes set fire to buildings and defeated the Russians, but suffered significant losses, rest of the army Patkul withdrew to Brandenburg.

Do you know the exact dates for Wladislawa, Rappin, Osiek, Cissowa, Grinkiski? Because it was easier to search information about these battles. Kcdlp (talk) 00:20, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

About Obica and Chybice, witnessed were participants of these battles. They said that the Poles and horses was wounded with a firearm.

Lidzbark/Lautenburg 1703, according to Wimmer, Poles had 6,000 men and was commanded by Jerzy Aleksander Lubomirski and general Brandt, Swedes had 1,000 men and was led by Creutz (losses are not given).

Kraków 1702, according to Polish sources, Swedes was commanded by Colonel Sparre, Swedes had to be forced to retreat to Kraków, perhaps this is other battle? Do you know who commanded the Poles?

Oder Beltsch, Tillendorf/Tylewice. You know what losses suffered Swedes? particularly in Tylewice.

Wladislawa 1703, maybe it is Włocławek, battle took place there in May 27, 1703. Lithuanians had 1,500 men, Swedes had several hundred, Lithuanians won the battle (according to Polish sources). In May 1703, there was also a skirmish in Warsaw, Poles won, Swedes had there 200 men, Poles captured 32 men (including 5 officers), how many were killed is not known.

About Rappin, Osiek, Cissowa and Grinkiski, I found nothing. Other skirmishes that I know, near Piotrków in September 1702, was a skirmish, Swedes had 500 men, Poles had numerical superiority, Poles won the battle, and Wieluń 1704, also Poles won. Kcdlp (talk) 17:29, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In this article about Chybice wites that, “A few months later, at the Battle of Punitz, Swedish cavalry abandoned the "guns" and example Poles, charge on infantry with only melee weapon in his hands.”

Skirmish in Warsaw took place in May 1703.

Yes, I tried to add 10 days to every date.Kcdlp (talk) 14:47, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Do you know anything about the Battle of Kościan in May 9, 1656? According to Polish sources, Swedes had 1,500-2,000 men (four regiments of cavalry) and were led by colonels Jean Otto de Wahl, Ernst v. Seherr. genannt Thoss, Lindro and Hesse. Polish army was irregular (pospolite ruszenie) and were led by voivode of Podlachia Jan Piotr Opaliński, strength are unknown. Poles won the battle and captured 14 banners, Swedes suffered heavy losses, colonels Thoss and Hesse were taken into captivity, Lindro was killed and Wahl probably escaped. One source says that, just 50 Swedes managed to escape. Poles losses are not known. Here is a German map from 1936 with marked place of battle, below there are pictures which show "Schweden schanze" probably it is the mass grave of the Swedish soldiers who died in this battle. Kcdlp (talk) 21:45, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Kościan is located very close to Poznań (about 40 km in a straight line). Governor of Poznań Weeseman send relief to besieged Kościan, part of Swedish troops were from Poznań and part from the surrounding garrisons. Names of the colonels, I took from this article, it is probably a German typing of the name. There is eight sources to this battle, all from Polish side. In these sources names are written differently and are rather incorrectly, e.g. Wahl is written as Valem and Wall (only in one source is Wahl). Kcdlp (talk) 16:41, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. I have one more question. During the War against Sigismund were three battles near Stegeborg, the first took place in September 8, 1598, the second in September 18 (I met also with the date September 19) and third in the night of September 20 on 21 (all dates according to the Gregorian calendar). Do you have any information about the first and third battle? Kcdlp (talk) 22:25, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In the book „Wojny i wojskowość polska w XVI wieku. Tom III. Lata 1576-1599” I found the information about the three battles. The first battle took place in September 8, Duke Charles attempted to attack the royal camp. Swedish infantry in the early morning came secretly into the position of Royalist. Royalist guards detected marching Swedish infantry and Jan Wejher with his banner attacked Swedes, giving the time for Hungarian and German infantry to prepare for fight. Hungarians and Germans supported the Wejher banner and forced the Swedes to withdraw. Royalists had 4 and Rebels 167 killed. In this book, this „battle” has been called the first important skirmish. About the third battle there is very little information. I know it took place at night, Royalist troops perform maneuver to circumvent Rebel army and there has been a battle which Royalists won. That's all I know. Kcdlp (talk) 15:16, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I found some information about the battle of Osiek which took place in 20 June 1703. Ludwik Pociej had 2,500 cavalry, Carl Mörner (you wrote about Johan Mörner) had 1,000 men. According to Polish sources Pociej won the battle.

I also have information about other skirmish.

Under the Melżyn in 29 August 1703. Pociej had 1,000 cavalry, Swedes had 200 men. Pociej also won.

9 August 1703. Lidzbark. Lubomirski and Brandt had 6,000 cavalry and dragoons, Carl Gustaf Creutz had 800-1,000 men. On the morning of August 9, 1,200 dragoons and reiters attacked the bridge and took it, the second bridge was burned by the Swedes, Poles crossed the river and Swedes were surrounded from three sides. Poles won the battle, losses were rather small, Swedes had 100 killed and 50 captured, Poles had 35 killed.

11 or 12 August 1703. Under Rypin, Lubomirski had 3,000-4,000 men and defeated the Swedish cavalry (I do not know who commanded the Swedes and their strength).

5 or 6 September 1703. Nowosielski had 2,000 men, Swedes had 400 cavalry. The battle took place on east of Września. Poles won.

Do you found any information about some other battles? Kcdlp (talk) 20:12, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know the exact date of the battle of Janiski? I'll try to find some information about it. Kcdlp (talk) 20:02, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, unfortunately, I found nothing in Polish source about battle of Janiski. I found only this, which, I suppose you've seen. Here you can see these two standards lost in Janiski and here is some information about the battle of Olkeniki in 1706.Kcdlp (talk) 13:09, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I recently read an article about the battle of Poniec. There was also some information about the battles of Tillendorf/Tylewice and Oderbeltsch/Bełcz Wielki. Under Oderbeltsch 2,000 Cossacks were attacked by the Swedes and Poles (Leszczyński supporters), Cossacks tried to cross the river or defend themselves in buildings, some of them drowned and about 1,500 were killed in battle. Under Tillendorf 1,500 Russians barricaded themselves in buildings, occupying defensive positions at the fences and farm houses. Swedes under the command of Maurice Vellingk (about 4,000 men) attacked them, after a fierce defense, the Russians were defeated. Russians have lost 900 killed, 14 cannons with a supply of ammunition, while Swedes had 80 killed and wounded.Kcdlp (talk) 13:30, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This article was written by Marek Wagner. Here on page 116 (the text is in Polish), there is little information about this raid Lubomirski and Brandt. However, this is not described in detail. Writes here that, 11 September, Lubomirski forced Sparre to retreat towards Kraków (has not mentioned the location where there was a battle). After this battle Lubomirski moved on north with 24 light cavalry banners (chorągwie). Two days later, Brandt under Pińczów attacked the Swedish cavalry (from Gyllenkrook and Creutz corps) "Swedes have lost many killed and wounded and more than 100 captives". Then Lubomirski attacked Swedes in Lidzbark "cut down some of them, and a part he took into captivity". Returning to camp, under Żarnowiec Lubomirski attacked 300 Swedes and defeated them. 28 September Lubomirski attacked Swedes in Piotrków, captured the city and took the Swedes into captivity. One banner (chorągiew) could have 80-200 men (paper strength) but at that time there were very low numbers in units, e.g. Hieronim Lubomirski in battle of Kliszów (Klissow) had a banners with only 20 men, while on paper strength had 100-120 men. I do not know how it was with those 24 banners. I'll try to find some battle reports or some letters that describe this a battle near Kraków, maybe Swedes retreated after the battle but unfortunately more information about this clashes with the Polish perspective I do not have.Kcdlp (talk) 18:18, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Do you know something more about Swedish-Danish war in 991?Kcdlp (talk) 23:18, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your answer. Unfortunately, from this period has been very little sources. Also in books, there is not much information about this.Kcdlp (talk) 20:27, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome Imonoz! Thank you for your contributions related to Poland. You may be interested in visiting Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland, joining the project, joining our discussions and sharing your creations with our community.

--<sub>Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here</sub> 16:09, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Battle of Trzciana (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Marienburg

Siege of Pärnu (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Charles IX

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:00, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Charles IX and Tre Kronor

Battle of Gniew (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Gronowo

Battle of Górzno (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Zaborowo

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:18, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your recent articles, including Battle of Weissenstein. When you create a new article, can you add the WikiProject assessment templates to the talk of that article? See the talk page of the article I mentioned for an example of what I mean. Usually it is very simple, you just add something like {{WikiProject Keyword}} to the article's talk, with keyword replaced by the associated WikiProject (ex. if it's a biography article, you would use WikiProject Biography; if it's a United States article, you would use WikiProject United States, and so on). You do not have to rate the article if you do not want to, others will do it eventually. Those templates are very useful, as they bring the articles to a WikiProject attention, and allow them to start tracking the articles through Wikipedia:Article alerts and other tools. This can help you too, as the WikiProject members will often defend your work from deletion and try to improve it further. Feel free to ask me any questions if you'd like more information. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 19:08, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Battle of Warsaw (1705), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Peter I (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:01, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Battle of Neuensund (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Strasburg and Vanguard

Battle of Zelbork (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Wenden

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:14, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

		The Exceptional Newcomer Award
		I award you The Exceptional Newcomer Award for your efforts to improve the coverage of Polish-Swedish military history. Keep it up! Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 21:56, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Battle of Wenden (1626), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Berson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:53, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Battle of Ruona, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Salmi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:43, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I plan to write three separate articles about the Danish, Polish and Russian fronts of the Great Northern War, since they were more or less separate conflicts within one greater war. Just like the Winter War and the Pacific War got their own articles separate from World War II, I think that my three ongoing articles should be added as well. Ninja of Tao (talk) 11:18, 7 May 2013 (UTC+1)

The article you linked to only describes a part of the Russian front, the main invasion 1708-1709. There were also the Baltic Coast campaigns 1700-1701 and a number of battles fought later in the war around the Finnish and Baltic territories. Ninja of Tao (talk) 16:53, 7 May 2013 (UTC+1)

Again, the article you referred to is only a part of one of the war's fronts. The Great Northern War would not be called "great" if it wasn't a conflict of immense size, covering a large area. There were primarily three fronts; The Danish (1700 and 1709-1720), the Polish (1701-1706 and 1709-1721), and the Russian (1700-1721). These can be further divided to the Dano-Swedish war of 1700, Dano-Swedish war of 1709-1721, Polish-Swedish war of 1701-1706, Polish-Swedish war of 1709-1721, Swedish-Saxon war 1700-1706, Baltic campaign of 1700-1710, Karl XII's invasion of Russia 1708-1709, the Russian invasion of Finland (Greater Wrath), and even the German front after Prussia joined the conflict in 1715. But I'm going to stick to the three primary fronts for now. (talk) 17:51, 7 May 2013 (UTC+1)

Indeed I should improve those articles; since they were conflicts I should add infoboxes ("warboxes") just like any other war or battle article has. However, I oppose the term "Charles XII" as it is a misleading foreign translation. His name were Karl XII, and Great Britain did not use the term "Charles" during his reign (they referred to him as Carolus, his latin name). Ninja of Tao (talk) 01:55, 8 May 2013 (UTC+1)

Hello again. The image you linked me to is most likely free to use, depending on which legal system you refer to. I believe that it is a photograph taken by an individual visiting a museum, though it could be one of the museum's official pictures. I do not know, unfortunately. Ninja of Tao (talk) 18:58, 1 August 2013 (UTC+1)

Unfortunately I have not been able to find the picture anywhere on Google, and I do not remember where I got it. I wish I could be of more help. Ninja of Tao (talk) 14:25, 5 August 2013 (UTC+1)

I have the original writing in Swedish and only needs to translate it and maybe add a few more sources before publishing the article. Ninja of Tao (talk) 16:39, 8 August 2013 (UTC+1)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Battle of Lesnaya (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Advance, Lesnaya, Defeat and Lewenhaupt

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 23:36, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, have you thought about reproducing or making your own maps in a way that gets round the copyright problem? There are people in the mapping project who may be willing to help, or even do it for you. This French fellow, Sting, has posted up a template which might be helpful. The English Wikipedia has a request page where you can get help. Maybe there is a similar page on Swedish Wikipedia? Cheers, Bjenks (talk) 06:57, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Battle of Narva (1700), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mortar (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:31, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm no trying to fool anyone, if that's your concern. I'm saying that in any tournament, a podium is a podium. It would have been any other team we would have kept it on their achievement list, but you want to take it off just because NiP's standards were incredibly high ? Makes no sense to me. An encyclopedia must be objective, and a 3-4th place is an achievement, whether you want it or not. I wouldn't have said anything if it was a 4-5th place or anything lower, because they wouldn't have made it to #3 obviously, but this tournament has no 3rd place match, so they are tied with fnatic for 3rd place. If you take any great champion, from any sport, will you see only his titles and finals on his wikipedia page ? Of course not. You'll see all his results, "good" or "bad". I'll put back the line, please don't remove it before we can discuss about it, I think it might lock part of the page, or even the whole page.

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Caroleans may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on .

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• png|200px|thumb|''Two different types formations and the execution of attack,<br/>A) company wise B) battalion wise.'']]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:18, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Caroleans (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Charge, Ranks, Squadron, Vulnerable, Position, Regular, Irregular, Coordination and Retreat

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 16:10, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Kirill <sup>[talk]</sup> 18:30, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Crossing of the Düna, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Floating bridge (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:20, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Imonoz. I've noted that you've had problems with Shervinky which echo the problems I've had with him/her for some time. There's further evidence of the translate, cut & paste (overwriting the most substantial parts of pre-existing articles), as well as his disruptive and non-collaborative attitude in discussions.

Please see Name of Ukraine and the corresponding talk page as one example. Another example is the Triune Russian people which this user created by translating directly from Russian Wikipedia. I've attempted to tag the article several times, only to have him/her try to escalate the reasonable tagging into an edit war by constantly undoing the tags (again, please take a look at the history where you can see the number of reverts and comments). I've left it without the tags for some time simply because I've been exasperated and no one else is interested in intervening.

If you need any assistance with your dispute, please feel free to call on me for support. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 21:55, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I haven't been answered on the Wikipedia page yet, but I'm one of those guys who would rather see no one getting blocked, maybe it just takes time for him to see that I contradict all his sources and clearly showed so in the article. If the problem would continue however, I would be very thankful having your support in the matter. Thanks. Imonoz (talk) 13:00, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, Imonoz. I'm trying to approach him on the same level... but he's undoubtedly a self-important, paranoid, stubborn contributor who doesn't possess any rudimentary social skills. I don't particularly want to see him blocked but his edit warring is particularly obnoxious (which is a serious accusation to make when you're talking about Slavic history). Oh, well, hope you sort things out. Give me a shout if it does get out of hand. Happy editing! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 03:44, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Battle of Lesnaya (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Surrendering, Triumph, Irregular, Withdraw and Detachment

Order of battle for the Battle of Lesnaya (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Lewenhaupt

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:24, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Battle of Rajovka, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Peter I (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Battle of Fehrbellin (1758), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Squadron (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Campaign of Grodno, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Posen and Frederick IV (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:52, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article Niklas Bäckström (fighter) has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. JDDJS (talk) 16:01, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Campaign of Grodno you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Feitlebaum -- Feitlebaum (talk) 23:01, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am the reviewer of the Campaign of Grodno article which you nominated for Good Article status. This article reached much of the criteria, but did not reach the prose and grammar criteria. You are free to edit as much as you like to help this article reach GA-status. Thank you for making Wikipedia a better place. You can see my assessment here. Feitlebaum (talk) 23:12, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my comment on the talk page of the article. I think that all that's missing from the lede right now is the reason for why the plan failed. From my reading of the article the reason for the Swedish success was the ability to quickly move troops around and surprise the allies. If this is a reasonable summary for why Charles outmaneuvered his opponents then we can add an extra sentence or so into the lede along those lines and then I think then it's pretty much good to go.Volunteer Marek (talk) 02:12, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I just wanted to let you know that another user brought up an issue about the article that I had missed when reviewing. One of the citations seems to have been confused with a footnote, and Wikipedia was cited (which is not allowed). This has me rather worried, and so I have decided to ask for a second opinion. Thank you for your patience. Feitlebaum (talk) 14:04, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article Campaign of Grodno you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Campaign of Grodno for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Feitlebaum -- Feitlebaum (talk) 00:21, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Imonoz. Some time ago, in the Campaign of Grodno review, Piotr brought up that Wikipedia had been cited for the number of casualties during the campaign. VoulunteerMarek replied about 13

days ago that he would fix this. It has not been fixed yet. The article's review started on June 1, and it should have been done on June 7. I apologize if I seem impatient, but if it not done soon,

I may have to fail the article. Thank you for your work on this article. Feitlebaum (talk) 01:52, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article Campaign of Grodno you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Campaign of Grodno for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Feitlebaum -- Feitlebaum (talk) 02:41, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats and great job! Volunteer Marek (talk) 08:18, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

		The Polish Barnstar of National Merit, 2nd Class
		I, Piotrus, award you The Polish Barnstar of National Merit, 2nd Class on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland for your numerous contributions to topics related to Polish history. Dziękujemy! Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 16:34, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
		this WikiAward was given to Imonoz by Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here on 16:34, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Ed <sup>[talk] [majestic titan]</sup> 22:06, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history Wikiproject has opened nominations for the Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year. Nominations will be accepted until 13 December at 23:59 GMT, with voting to begin at 0:00 GMT 14 December. The voting will conclude on 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:41, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This message was accidentally sent using an incorrect mailing list, therefore this message is being resent using the correct list. As a result, some users may get this message twice; if so please discard. We apologize for the inconvenience.

Nominations for the military historian of the year and military newcomer of the year have now closed, and voting for the candidates has officially opened. All project members are invited to cast there votes for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year candidates before the elections close at 23:59 December 21st. For the coordinators, TomStar81

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 29 September. Yours, Ed <sup>[talk] [majestic titan]</sup> 05:21, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On behalf of the Military history WikiProject's Coordinators, we would like to extend an invitation to nominate deserving editors for the 2015 Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards. The nomination period will run from 7 December to 23:59 13 December, with the election phase running from 14 December to 23:59 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:06, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Battle of Lesnaya, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Nöteborg and Berezovka. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:43, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Battle of Holowczyn, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alexander Gordon. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:52, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Battle of Varja, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wesenberg. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:17, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway, and as a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 23 September. For the Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:00, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Imonoz. I've just spotted some activity on this page; the most recent edits in the article and on the talk page seems to have been made by a person who is sort of a friend of mine. I'll check the sources and try to solve the conflict as soon as possible. Eriba-Marduk (talk) 10:02, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Great. I've just checked everything and it turned out that the "new" source added to the article is actually the same as the one I already cited there almost a year ago (it wasn't available online at that time, as far as I remember). It's the first work on the subject that is based on Russian archival materials of the mid-17th century, such as the documents of state officials and the monarch, the materials collected and checked by the court of inquiry under Count I. I. Lobanov-Rostovsky, which was supervised by the Crown and investigated the causes of the defeat, and include the testimonies of soldiers, different official reports, etc. In short, that is undoubtedly the most credible source to date on the size and casualties of the Russian army at the Battle of Walk and as such should be preferred over a simple claim of the other side. Nevertheless, I cannot but agree with you that the Swedish "8,000 men" should also be present in the article along with the new estimate, as it has long been the only casualty figure for the Russian side at all (it's quite disappointing that for many years historians were relying upon a single non-Russian source when describing a Russian army). Anyway, I believe that at present the article is good enough, so I haven't changed anything. Eriba-Marduk (talk) 16:33, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is interesting. I get the Russian archives and all, do they go into detail of the Russian troops in terms of regiments and such? Do they mention any civilians and or peasants fighting with the Russians? 136 killed and wounded to up to 1,500 killed and wounded is such a huge gap that I don't know what to think of this, only that either one side used propaganda to an unbelievable degree or that a lot of camp-followers or peasants died with the Russians making the numbers so big. What do the Russian archives say about standards and banners lost? The Swedish sources says they captured 32 of those in the battle, if this is true, a number of only 108 killed seems unlikely. I could try asking some actual Swedish professionals on the subject, see what they think, if you wish. Imonoz (talk) 17:06, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, the article is relatively short in its description of the Battle at Walk (that's not the main topic of the work) and doesn't say anything about civilians or banners. But nonetheless it provides a few notable documents sent by Tsar Alexis I and Count T. Scherbatov that might explain the relatively low number of casualties in Russian sources and shed some light on the battle. They state that the larger part of the army disobeyed their commander in the beginning of the battle, dropped their standards and left the battlefield (which, unsurprisingly, gave rise to a criminal investigation), leaving Sheremetyev behind with a "few men" to fight against the Swedes. The latter, seeing that the enemy was in full retreat, went on the offensive. Sheremetyev fought as long as he could, trying to hold them off and even attack the advancing Swedish troops, but was wounded and captured after his horse was killed underneath him. That, in short, is how they describe it and why the losses weren't larger. Alexis I states in his letter: "And I thank God that so [few] have been lost out of three thousands, and everyone is safe, because they retreated".

As for the huge gap, Kurbatov warns that 17th-century official publications on sieges and battles, especially since the Thirty Years' War, often exaggerated the number of enemy troops and casualties, served propaganda purposes and were in many ways similar to the periodic Bulletins of the French Grande Armée, which popularised the phrase "to lie like a Bulletin". That is one of the reasons why he prefers numerous other documents over a few official battle descriptions. Eriba-Marduk (talk) 20:25, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. Just as generals sought promotions by exaggerating the victory, or in other cases hold them by minimizing the loss. I'll check back to this conversation as fast as I can find more about this and get help from Swedish experts who are studying these times as my knowledge here is very limited. Imonoz (talk) 21:30, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's a great idea. I've just found O. Kurbatov on Facebook, so I can reach him there. He specialises in the Russian military history of the 16th-17th centuries and is highly notable in this field. Eriba-Marduk (talk) 15:48, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Time is running out to voting for the Military Historian and Newcomer of the year! If you have not yet cast a vote, please consider doing so soon. The voting will end on 31 December at 23:59 UTC, with the presentation of the awards to the winners and runners up to occur on 1 January 2017. For the Military history WikiProject Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:00, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This message was sent as a courtesy reminder to all active members of the Military History WikiProject.

G'day all, please be advised that throughout March 2017 the Military history Wikiproject is running its March Madness drive. This is a backlog drive that is focused on several key areas:

• tagging and assessing articles that fall within the project's scope
• updating the project's currently listed A-class articles to ensure their ongoing compliance with the listed criteria
• creating articles that are listed as "requested" on the project's various task force pages or other lists of missing articles.

As with past Milhist drives, there are points awarded for working on articles in the targeted areas, with barnstars being awarded at the end for different levels of achievement.

The drive is open to all Wikipedians, not just members of the Military history project, although only work on articles that fall (broadly) within the military history scope will be considered eligible. More information can be found here for those that are interested, and members can sign up as participants at that page also.

The drive starts at 00:01 UTC on 1 March and runs until 23:59 UTC on 31 March 2017, so please sign up now.

For the Milhist co-ordinators. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) & MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:23, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Great Northern War shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

I know it is an argument with an IP user but please try to resolve the matter via the talk page. - Wanderer602 (talk) 17:28, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway. As a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 29 September. Thank you for your time. For the current tranche of Coordinators, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:39, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As we approach the end of the year, the Military History project is looking to recognise editors who have made a real difference. Each year we do this by bestowing two awards: the Military Historian of the Year and the Military History Newcomer of the Year. The co-ordinators invite all project members to get involved by nominating any editor they feel merits recognition for their contributions to the project. Nominations for both awards are open between 00:01 on 2 December 2017 and 23:59 on 15 December 2017. After this, a 14-day voting period will follow commencing at 00:01 on 16 December 2017. Nominations and voting will take place on the main project talkpage: here and here. Thank you for your time. For the co-ordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:35, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings,

"Military history" is one of the most important subjects when speak of sum of all human knowledge. To support contributors interested in the area over various language Wikipedias, we intend to form a user group. It also provides a platform to share the best practices between military historians, and various military related projects on Wikipedias. An initial discussion was has been done between the coordinators and members of WikiProject Military History on English Wikipedia. Now this discussion has been taken to Meta-Wiki. Contributors intrested in the area of military history are requested to share their feedback and give suggestions at Talk:Discussion to incubate a user group for Wikipedia Military Historians.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:30, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

TWO barnstars. I am overwhelmed. Thank you very much. It is appreciated. Gog the Mild (talk) 23:37, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I have seen your work on articles about Polish history and some of the sources you have used that are in Polish. One of my articles which is currently a FAC is about a Polish singer Margaret (singer) and most of the sources used there are in Polish. I was wondering if you could review them. Do you think you’d be able to do that? I do understand that this is not a topic you contribute to on Wikipedia, however I would very much appreciate your help as the lack of sources review stands in the way of the article getting promoted. Hope to hear back from you. Regards ArturSik (talk) 21:55, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm Swedish not Polish. I will not be able to review any Polish sources, I'm sorry! Imonoz (talk) 04:23, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Have you worked with anyone who speakes Polish and would be able to do that. Thank you for getting back to me :) ArturSik (talk) 10:40, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@ArturSik:, Yes I have. You could try asking either Piotrus or Volunteer Marek, they are both nice guys which I've had the fortune to work with on Swedish-Polish related articles. They can perhaps help you. Imonoz (talk) 11:28, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much. I will definitely contact them. Best wishes. ArturSik (talk) 11:52, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@ArturSik: You should ask on WT:POLAND, but we have just few active people, and I don't think we have anyone interested in popculture. --<sub>Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here</sub> 18:45, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your work on Battle of Warsaw is really good! We could have helped you iron out some issues had you put it up for Good Article and A-Class before going to featured status. I agree with the reviewer who questioned allies/Allies. Are you going to work on other articles from this era? Let any of the coordinators know if we can help! Cheers, auntieruth (talk) 15:12, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Auntieruth55: Thank you. I appriciate that and I will certainly go GA or A-class next time. I also agree with the confusion of "allies" in the article, I'm happy you helped me out in the Aftermath. This era (+/- 100 years) is probably the only one I will work on (involving Swedish history). For this article (Battle of Warsaw (1705)) I took inspiration from the article you had worked on in the Seven Years' War, especially Battle of Leuthen to structure the citations etc. Imonoz (talk) 17:08, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thank you for your contributions. Feel free to call on my any time for some help sorting out the vagaries of wikipedia.  :) Cheers, auntieruth (talk) 17:58, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		The Epic Barnstar
		Battle of Warsaw was a lot more work than I think you expected, but you stuck with it. You have put a lot of work in to achieve a fine, high quality article. I think that only I realise just how much blood, sweat, toil and tears you did put in. In inadequate recognition I present this aptly named Epic Barnstar. Enjoy it in good health. Gog the Mild (talk) 23:39, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

PS What's next? I can hardly wait. Gog the Mild (talk) 23:40, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Gog the Mild: Thank you for your kind words and the barnstar, it's a great looking one too! But really, thank you so much for all the help with the article. I never felt like I stood alone throughout this whole time which is because of you. And this, even with all the other articles you worked on during the time (with the Razing of Friesoythe article which I read once you made it and really enjoyed, congratulations to you here on a very "good article"). I'm impressed. I own a thank you to many people helping me here, some more than others, but especially you. We did this together and now we can finally say it: we did it.. I have no idea what's next here on Wikipedia. Only that I'm not bound to a FAC anymore, which is quite a relief (for the moment ;), you must feel the same. Again, thank you. Imonoz (talk) 05:38, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

G'day all, please be advised that throughout April 2018 the Military history Wikiproject is running its annual backlog elimination drive. This will focus on several key areas:

• tagging and assessing articles that fall within the project's scope
• adding or improving listed resources on Milhist's task force pages
• updating the open tasks template on Milhist's task force pages
• creating articles that are listed as "requested" on the project's various lists of missing articles.

As with past Milhist drives, there are points awarded for working on articles in the targeted areas, with barnstars being awarded at the end for different levels of achievement.

The drive is open to all Wikipedians, not just members of the Military history project, although only work on articles that fall (broadly) within the scope of military history will be considered eligible. This year, the Military history project would like to extend a specific welcome to members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red, and we would like to encourage all participants to consider working on helping to improve our coverage of women in the military. This is not the sole focus of the edit-a-thon, though, and there are aspects that hopefully will appeal to pretty much everyone.

The drive starts at 00:01 UTC on 1 April and runs until 23:59 UTC on 30 April 2018. Those interested in participating can sign up here.

For the Milhist co-ordinators, AustralianRupert and MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:54, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Imonoz. I hope that you are keeping well. I stumbled across the battle of Kletsk and thought that with some tidying up it could be promoted to B class. I was surprised to discover that you originated it. I was wondering if you have a source to cover the first paragraph? The one ending "...mainly due to Polish irregular forces continuing to fight." Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:21, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Gog the Mild: Hello Gog! I'm doing quite alright, hope the same goes for you. I'm happy and quite surprised you saw that article, I made it 6 years (!) ago, wow time really flies by.. Anyway, the problem with it lies with the primary source itself (Slaget vid Kletsk, Arkivcentrum), it's outdated and no longer available unfortunately, and I think that source might have supported the paragraph. I might have some other literature on the battle to replace the online source, but I don't have much time now (I'm sorry) - I've recently started rewriting another article "Battle of Gadebusch" (in a rather slow pace) I want to push to FA, much like Warsaw 1705, so most of my energy on Wikipedia goes there for the moment. During the time, it might work to just remove that paragraph as it is just a wrap-up of the war thus far and not really necessary for this particular article. I don't really know when my Gadebusch article will be done, as I'm not rushing it (I'm translating mainly from a Danish source (quite related to Swedish, but still hard enough to give me some problems), to English, which is a little troubling for me as neither the language im translating from- or to, is my mother tounge. Anyways, when I'm finally done I'll let you know (as I would most prefer having you C/E it) and show it to you and see if it interests you. Imonoz (talk) 17:21, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I deleted some and reworked the rest so that I could use a reference from the Campaign of Grodno. I am pleased to hear that you are keeping busy. Yes, I would be more than happy to help with your latest project in any way that I can. It looks like a fascinating topic, badly in need of improving. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:41, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Cheers, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:54, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

G'day everyone, voting for the 2018 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:35, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

G'day everyone, voting for the 2018 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:22, 15 September 2018 (UTC) Note: the previous version omitted a link to the election page, therefore you are receiving this follow up message with a link to the election page to correct the previous version. We apologies for any inconvenience that this may have caused.[reply]

Hi everyone, just a quick reminder that voting for the WikiProject Military history coordinator election closes soon. You only have a day or so left to have your say about who should make up the coordination team for the next year. If you have already voted, thanks for participating! If you haven't and would like to, vote here before 23:59 UTC on 28 September. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:29, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for our annual Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards are open until 23:59 (GMT) on 15 December 2018. Why don't you nominate the editors who you believe have made a real difference to the project in 2018? MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:27, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for our annual Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards is open until 23:59 (GMT) on 30 December 2018. Why don't you vote for the editors who you believe have made a real difference to Wikipedia's coverage of military history in 2018? MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:17, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		The WikiChevrons
		For your work on Battle of Warsaw (1705) you are hereby presented with the WikiChevrons. Congrats! TomStar81 (Talk) 19:17, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In the month of September, Wikiproject Military history is running a project-wide edit-a-thon, Backlog Banzai. There are heaps of different areas you can work on, for which you claim points, and at the end of the month all sorts of whiz-bang awards will be handed out. Every player wins a prize! There is even a bit of friendly competition built in for those that like that sort of thing. Sign up now at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/September 2019 Backlog Banzai to take part. For the coordinators, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:18, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:39, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

G'day everyone, voting for the 2019 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:37, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

G'day everyone, the voting for the XIX Coordinator Tranche is at the halfway mark. The candidates have answered various questions, and you can check them out to see why they are running and decide whether you support them. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:37, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just an invitation to the blurb review. Enjoy your time off! - Dank (push to talk) 12:32, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

G'day all, March Madness 2020 is about to get underway, and there is bling aplenty for those who want to get stuck into the backlog by way of tagging, assessing, updating, adding or improving resources and creating articles. If you haven't already signed up to participate, why not? The more the merrier! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:19, 29 February 2020 (UTC) for the coord team[reply]

You can view it here: Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Rakkestad.

I encourage you to nominate future articles you create, expand 5x in size, or improve to GA, as most of the content in DYK is from North America and Britain. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 03:27, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@The Squirrel Conspiracy: Thank you! (I guess?). I'm not sure I understand fully what this means? I suppose it's so that the article gets more attention? Is there anything I have to do? Imonoz (talk) 03:31, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I nominated the article to appear in the "Did you know ..." section of the main page, which highlights new articles, articles that are expanded 5x in size, and articles that make GA status. Sometime in the next few weeks - hopefully on August 6 since that's the anniversary of the battle - it will be on the main page for 12 hours. There's nothing you need to do, but you may wish to watchlist the nomination page in case the reviewer has any questions about the article, since I don't have access to the sources. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 03:37, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I understand! Thank you – Will do!

(←) I just nominated Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Lemberg (1704) too. Keep up the good work! As an American, this was my first time learning that there even was a Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 01:40, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@The Squirrel Conspiracy: Understood! I will double check the source of that claim tomorrow since it was a while ago I wrote the article (but for some reason didn't publish it until now). It should of course be correct, but I need to be certain. Thank you! Imonoz (talk) 02:39, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Imonoz

Thank you for creating Great Sortie of Stralsund.

User:Buidhe, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Great article. Thanks for your contributions! Consider a WP:DYK nomination.

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Buidhe}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

buidhe 19:28, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

		The Feather Barnstar
		By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this barnstar in recognition of your continued fine content creation on articles generally, the Great Northern War specifically and the Battle of Lemberg (1704) in particular. Classy work. Keep it coming. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:35, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much Gog the Mild, I appreciate that (especially when it comes from you). I've seen some of the work you've accomplished here since 2018 (when we both worked on the Warsaw article) you've gone so far. I'm truly truly impressed. Imonoz (talk) 11:51, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't seem that long ago that I was doing a little copy editing on your FA, and ever having a FAC of my own seemed a ridiculous dream. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:11, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:01, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:07, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

G'day everyone, voting for the 2020 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2020. Thanks from the outgoing coord team, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:18, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:25, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

G'day all, the nominations for the 2020 Military history WikiProject newcomer and Historian of the Year are open, all editors are encouraged to nominate candidates for the awards before until 23:59 (GMT) on 15 December 2020, after which voting will occur for 14 days. There is not much time left to nominate worthy recipients, so get to it! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:46, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

G'day all, voting for the WikiProject Military history "Military Historian of the Year" and "Military history newcomer of the year" is about to close, so if you haven't already, click on the links and have your say before 23:59 (GMT) on 30 December! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:35, 28 December 2020 (UTC) for the coord team[reply]

Hey y'all, the April 2021 WikiProject Military History Reviewing Drive begins at 00:01 UTC on April 1, 2021 and runs through 23:59 UTC on April 31, 2021. Points can be earned through reviewing articles on the AutoCheck report, reviewing articles listed at WP:MILHIST/ASSESS, reviewing MILHIST-tagged articles at WP:GAN or WP:FAC, and reviewing articles submitted at WP:MILHIST/ACR. Service awards and barnstars are given for set points thresholds, and the top three finishers will receive further awards. To participate, sign up at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_History/April 2021 Reviewing Drive#Participants and create a worklist at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/April 2021 Reviewing Drive/Worklists (examples are given). Further details can be found at the drive page. Questions can be asked at the drive talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:27, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Battle of Lier requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Mccapra (talk) 21:47, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Mccapra:, hello! I'm trying to move Battle of Lier (1808) into the redirect page; I requested a move here: Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests as it told me to go this way (or so I think?). Just wanted you to know in case you did not come from my message there. Imonoz (talk) 21:53, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've created a dab page at "battle of Lier" so that readers will be sure to get to the right battle. Here is a link to the discussion at WP:RM/TR for future reference.[6] (t · c) buidhe 17:32, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Buidhe: thank you! That's perfect. I changed the place; apparently I had it wrong earlier in the Battle of Lier (1808) article. Saw it now, thanks to you. Imonoz (talk) 21:55, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Battle of Helsingborg, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Copperplate. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:59, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are still open, but not for long. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! No further nominations will be accepted after that time. Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:43, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey y'all, voting for the 2021 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2021. Voting will be conducted at the 2021 tranche page itself. Appropriate questions for the candidates can also be asked. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:41, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey y'all, voting for the 2021 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche will be closing soon. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2021. Voting will be conducted at the 2021 tranche page itself. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:34, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Imonoz

Thank you for creating Swedish invasion of Saxony.

User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Good article! Thanks for the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 02:15, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! And thank you for the quick review. Imonoz (talk) 03:56, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		The WikiChevrons
		By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this award in recognition of the fine work you have done on Swedish invasion of Saxony. I hope both that it is going straight to GAN and that there will be more of simiar ilk. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:02, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, thank you so much, Gog the Mild! This makes me very happy. Maybe I'll try to get it to GA in the near future, who knows. Thanks again! Imonoz (talk) 23:02, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are opening in a few hours (00:01 UTC on 1 September). A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:52, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for the upcoming project coordinator election opens in a few hours (00:01 UTC on 15 September) and will last through 23:59 on 28 September. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. Voting is conducted using simple approval voting and questions for the candidates are welcome. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:27, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick correction to the prior message about the 2022 MILHIST coordinator election! I (Hog Farm) didn't proofread the message well enough and left out a link to the election page itself in this message. The voting will occur here; sorry about the need for a second message and the inadvertent omission from the prior one. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:42, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for the upcoming project coordinator election closes soon, at 23:59 on 28 September. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. Voting is conducted using simple approval voting and questions for the candidates are welcome. The voting itself is occurring here If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:14, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Military career of Napoleon Bonaparte, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New York.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election have opened. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:05, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I was wondering if you had any sources or information about the Polish Swedish war of 1563-1568, I was interested in making an English article for it and thought it would be good to have both Polish and Swedish sources in order to have it be as informative as possible. Thank you. Gvssy (talk) 01:05, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Gvssy : Unfortunately, I'm not very familiar with Polish sources. There's, however, a chapter dedicated to the war in the newly released Wojny Rzeczypospolitej ze Szwecją 1563–1721. Although, you should be able to get a somewhat neutral perspective in The Northern Wars: War, State and Society in Northeastern Europe, 1558-1721. As far as Swedish sources are concerned, try Bidrag till belysning av den baltiska fronten under det nordiska sjuårskriget 1563-1570 or even Nordiska sjuårskriget 1563-1570. I haven't read any of them, so I can't tell you about the quality. Sadly, I'm not able to find them available to read online, so the library might be your best bet. Imonoz (talk) 01:47, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, i'll be sure to check them out Gvssy (talk) 03:03, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, 'The Northern Wars' doesn't seem to include much or any information at all about the war, so disregard that source. Imonoz (talk) 12:28, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2023! The the top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki . Cast your votes vote here and here respectively. Voting closes at 23:59 on 30 December 2023. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:56, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

hey, it is about time I checked: you have got a harv-error (here too) Kolya Muratov (talk) 18:46, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I think I got them. Tell me if I missed any. Imonoz (talk) 22:30, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, my doubt is about that Swedish strength in this battle during the late March.

Combining Swedish and Russian sources, I tried to go for logic here when editing. How do you, as the article's creator, feel about what I put in there? — perhaps you have more Swedish sources, that describe events in the late March in Old Style (11 days longer in New Style). — Maybe something does not add up. Kolya Muratov (talk) 15:17, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. I've got some sources regarding this battle(s). I intend to visit this article soon; if my memory serves me right, Swedish sources talk about a battle on 15 April (during when they took the position from the Russians) in which both sides had several hundred men - the Swedish a few hundred more than the Russians. The old numbers of 1,400 Swedes against 4,000–5,000 Russians on 30 April seemingly referred to only an isolated part of the battle (in fact, the Swedes had some 3,000 men + a battalion); I noticed this first after you changed these numbers for the better. Imonoz (talk) 21:57, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Got you Kolya Muratov (talk) 13:46, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, there is still a small "task" if you want — Battle of Reval. My source says that Swedish historians point to a figure of 150 Swedish losses (I have supplemented the article); it would be possible to add these very Swedish sources in question.

Unfortunately, I don't have a lot of sources regarding the Battle of Reval. There's a book that should cover it - about all Swedish-Russian naval engagements in the 1788-1790 war - but it's not in my possession (yet). However, if I find any other sources, I'll make sure to add them. Imonoz (talk) 22:51, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, maybe I will use it. But a question, is it possible to order books from Sweden to Russia now, are you aware? Kolya Muratov (talk) 12:01, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I actually have no idea whether or not books are included in the EU sanctions, which I assume Sweden follows. If you're lucky, a Russian library has already imported the book. Imonoz (talk) 22:37, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

According to the Swedish government there don't appear to be any specific restrictions on the import of books, but I don't think it's possible since I don't think flights go to Russia anymore. Gvssy (talk) 11:56, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that is true, by the looks of it. Kolya Muratov (talk) 05:43, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for calling attention to this hoax. I find it really disturbing to occasionally discover hoaxes which have persisted for so long, which have to make one wonder how many more there are, still undetected. JBW (talk) 15:59, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I would like to discuss the above article with you. I do not think that this is a victory for the Swedes, because the main goal of the battle - to take St. Petersburg failed. You also claim that the Swedes successfully formed the Neva River, although my sources claim that the Swedes were overturned and thwarted an attempt to cross Dushnilkin (talk) 19:00, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The main goal for the Swedes with the battle was to cross the Neva, which they succeeded in doing according to both Russian and Swedish sources; the campaign in Ingria ended with a failure, but that doesn't mean every battle in it were suddenly Russian victories. As far as I can tell, the source you added, explicitly says that the Swedes did in fact cross the Neva, after the Russian force opposing them retreated. It also mentions how a certain major was sent by F.M. Apraksin to count the Swedish dead several days later, after the Swedish army had already made it inside Russian-controlled Ingria; but there's no mention of a Russian counterattack at Neva where the Swedes were "overturned and suffered heavy losses" and "were forced to retreat". In fact, and again, the source you're using agrees that the Swedish army made it over the Neva and into Russian-controlled Ingria. It was only later, due to the lack of siege artillery and provisions that they decided to evacuate, which they did on October 27 (see the article Evacuation of Kolkanpää). Also, Dorrell, who you're citing to support your claim of a Russian victory, is actually mentioning how the Swedes made it across the river. So you're either very confused, or just editing in bad faith. Imonoz (talk) 20:20, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, sorry to disturb, I was wondering what Ulf Sundberg says about the result of the Deluge in his book "Svenska krig 1630–1814". I was reading one of your articles and I saw that you had cited the book.

If you still have access to it, I would be thankful if you could give me a quote or something of the sort.

Thanks! Gvssy (talk) 22:11, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gvssy : Hello. You're not disturbing. On page 123, Sundberg writes: "Segrare: Polen" and "Svenska krigsmål: Det är inte helt okontroversiellt att uttala sig om de svenska krigsmålen. Dessa förändrades sannolikt under fälttågets gång. Ett tydligt grundmål var att utvidga det svenska väldet på Polens bekostnad. Kurland, Ostpreussen och Danzig hägrade. Ostpreussen är vid krigsutbrottet ett län under Polen med Fredrik Vilhelm I av Brandenburg som länsherre. Karl X Gustav utropar sig på ett tidigt stadium i kriget till kung i Polen. Detta kan tolkas som att han då syftade till landets totala erövring. Senare under kriget begränsades ambitionen till en delning av Polen mellan Sverige och Brandenburg."

On page 141, he finishes the conflict with: "De pågående fredsförhandlingarna förlamas av att Karl X Gustav inte kan tänka sig en fred utan svenska landvinningar. När Karl X Gustav oväntat avlider den 13 februari kan man stryka dessa krav. Förhandlingarna flyttas från Thorn till klostret i Oliva. Den 23 april kan fred slutas mellan Sverige och Polen, tyske kejsaren och Brandenburg. Villkoren är att Johan Kasimir avsäger sig sina anspråk på Sveriges krona och erkänner Sveriges innehav av Estland och Livland norr om floden Düna. Övriga erövrade områden skall återställas."

Hope this helped! Imonoz (talk) 22:46, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for checking, I wanted to see if his newer books said something different is all. Gvssy (talk) 23:15, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gvssy : Might be worth checking out Robert I. Frost's "The Northern Wars". It's one of the best works in English when it comes to the wars of Sweden, Russia, Denmark and, in particular, Poland. Here's a link (actually, I'm not sure if I'm allowed to give it here, but it should be available in "View history" nevertheless), in case you haven't already got access to it. Imonoz (talk) 23:39, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election have opened. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:42, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for WikiProject Military history coordinators is now open! A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. Register your vote here by 23:59 UTC on 29 September! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:35, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2024! The the top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki. Nominations are open here and here respectively. The nomination period closes at 23:59 on 30 November 2024 when voting begins. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. MediaWiki message delivery via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:21, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2024! The top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki. Cast your votes here and here respectively. Voting closes at 23:59 on 30 December 2024. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. MediaWiki message delivery via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:00, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]