This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lithuania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lithuania 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.LithuaniaWikipedia:WikiProject LithuaniaTemplate:WikiProject LithuaniaLithuania articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland 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.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
BTW Radosław Sikora presented quite good and convincing arguments that Polish forces at Klushino couldn't be larger than 4500
Szopen13:14, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's the problem, I know its argument from discussion, but I had to buy the book 'cause the discussion on internet forum can hardly be considered good reference :) I won't touch the article 'till I will find it, I promise. The argumetn was that the number 6000 is taken from the list of all Polish units taking part in the adventure, and Sikora showed that at least one of that units certainly didn't participate in the battle Szopen11:16, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think the 'British' mercenaries in Swedish service were in fact Irish, see Flight of the Wild Geese. This source http://www.illyria.com/irish/mcginn_irishagains.html mentions an unnamed Swedish battle against Poland around this time in which the Irish defected from the Swedes to the Poles for religious reasons. Seems like a probable match. And highly interesting, because it looks like the foreign mercenaries had a decisive role in this Polish victory. Please check this out if you have access to Klushino sources. Thanks -Chumchum7 (talk) 21:29, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So there where 4000 Poles and up to 40000 Russians... Subtract the forces that didn't take part this gives..."12,300 Poles against 48,000 Russians". Hmm... 217.235.43.215 (talk) 00:22, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You don't believe but it will not change the facts. The well trained and equipped Polish hussars could easily crash the Infantry. Additionally, The Russians, however, did not know the real strength of the Poles, and how greatly they outnumbered them. - this was also a reason of failure. High/low morale is an important factor. Merewyn (talk) 18:23, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I had to revert edits by Badud (talk·contribs) again. While this time a reference was provided, it was a 1904 reference ([1]), without a page range (direct link to p.7-8 did not provide any useful information). Further problems include poor English in the unreferenced paragraph added (this article is B-class and should maintain the B-class requirements in language quality and references), and a claim that seems very OR and most certainly cannot be supported, even one stretched AGF, by a 1904 source ("Since 1950s during soviet occupation - soviet “historians” spread false interpretation of documents and invented 6,600-6,800 horses=soldiers"). Also, the edits removed numbers from the 1995 Nagielski book (certainly, not a Soviet-era publication). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here19:17, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have just modified 2 external links on Battle of Klushino. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to trueorfailed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
I have just modified 2 external links on Battle of Klushino. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
