Talk:Caroline affair

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Caroline affair article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Canada: Ontario / History Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Ontario portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ontario.
	This article is supported by WikiProject History of Canada.

United Kingdom Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Maritime / British / Canadian / European / North America / United States Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	British military history task force
	Canadian military history task force
	European military history task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ships

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles

Shipwrecks Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shipwrecks, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of shipwreck-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ShipwrecksWikipedia:WikiProject ShipwrecksTemplate:WikiProject ShipwrecksShipwreck articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Shipwreck-related priority open tasks:

To Do

Lady Elizabeth (1879)
- Clean up typos Currently working on it-----Completed!
- Improve grammar
- Add any additions if needed Still adding more information
- Discuss desired additions -None

Assessment

I have assessed this as Start Class, as it contains more detail and organization than would be expected of a Stub (barely) and of low importance, as I feel the events in question are more critical to Britain and the United States than Canada. Cheers, CP 16:32, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Quotation typo?

I wonder if the quotation contains a typo. In "though of holding them responsible," should "though" be "thought"? I am sure that is the meaning, but unsure if this could be an alternate spelling or a mistake in the original source.

Looks like a typo to me. I've fixed it. Pburka (talk) 02:18, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

centuries

Thus the destruction of an insignificant ship in what one scholar has called a "comic opera affair" in the early 19th century nonetheless led to the establishment of a principle of international life that would govern, at least in theory, the use of force for over 250 years.

So, beyond 2087? —Tamfang (talk) 08:00, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've put the sic template at that point. It could be a typo for "over 150 years"? But I don't have the source to check it. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 19:05, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

African American?

This article states that Amos Durfee, the alleged rebel martyr, was African American, but doesn't provide a direct citation for this. Does anyone know where that information comes from? LeftAlberta1968 (talk) 20:58, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pass or fail?

The article doesn’t say whether the British actions in the Caroline affair passed the Caroline test. —Michael Z. 02:13, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There was no international or binational tribunal that assessed the issue, so not possible to say. The US and Britain settled it by the treaty. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 03:44, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, but it’s not even clear whether in the treaty they agreed that the affair had been justified or not. —Michael Z. 13:32, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Treaties are generally prospective. The parties enter into them to resolve issues, but generally without commenting on past liability: "agree to disagree" sort of thing. The treaty in this case provided solutions going forward, such as Article X, which provided for extradition of fugitives. Treaties that allocate blame don't always fare so well, as the "war guilt" clause in the Treaty of Versailles demonstrates. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 19:50, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. —Michael Z. 14:13, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]