Talk:Mexican–American War
| This It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
De Facto vs De Jure
Shouldn't the statement"the Republic of Texas was De Facto a independent country" be replaced with De Jure? 2600:8800:2A0F:F900:959A:EEC3:352E:14A2 (talk) 18:02, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- Idk 2600:1700:4A58:2910:D854:B418:36E6:9C08 (talk) 23:54, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
Role of Women section is too prominent
The "Role of Women" section is featured much more prominently than in other 19th century conflicts (see Crimea, War of 1812, others). The section's position, between Preparation and Events, leads the reader to believe this conflict was uniquely influenced by women. That is not true of this conflict--the role of women was typical for the era and societies involved. I propose that this section be reduced to a link to the article Women in the Mexican–American War and be positioned in a way that matches articles about similar conflicts. 184.176.143.8 (talk) 00:20, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
- I had previously broken out content into a sub-article on Women in the Mexican-American War, and do agree that we discuss it at too much length here. We could make better use of WP:SUMMARYSTYLE. In general, the article is much too long at 110 kb readable. Although a wholesale removal is too much. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 03:01, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
Casualties?
On 2025-09-27T21:36:57 User:217.177.137.40 changed the number of US troops "killed" in the infobox from 3,500 to 1,733, without changing the reference cited:
{{Cite web |url=https://www.dmdc.osd.mil/dcas/pages/report_principal_wars.xhtml |title=Official DOD data |access-date=March 8, 2014 |archive-date=February 28, 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140228202255/https://www.dmdc.osd.mil/dcas/pages/report_principal_wars.xhtml |url-status=dead }}
Sadly, I was unable to get anything with either reference.
Can someone find a current reference for this?
In the meantime, I'm reverting this change. Thanks, DavidMCEddy (talk) 01:14, 28 September 2025 (UTC)
- John W. Chambers, II, ed. in chief, The Oxford Companion to American Military History. (Oxford University Press, 1999, ISBN 0-19-507198-0), 849 217.177.137.40 (talk) 15:01, 28 September 2025 (UTC)
- Clodfelter 2017, p. 249. 217.177.137.40 (talk) 15:03, 28 September 2025 (UTC)
- The original post already had 1,733 listed. It was changed to 3,500 by
- "18:33, 8 September 2025 2601:8c0:800:8810:a4b0:71b9:a7b5:c73a talk 219,762 bytes 0 1. Monterrey → U.S. officially ~368 dead, Mexican claims suggest higher. 2. Buena Vista → U.S. officially ~267 dead, Mexican sources say ~800. 3. Molino del Rey → U.S. ~116 killed, but wounded were very high; some Mexican sources claim more Americans died. Even with conservative U.S. numbers, the total killed in these three battles alone approaches or exceeds the 1,700 “official” combat deaths that the U.S. claims for the entire war. This is why: • Official U.S. reports almost certainly... undo Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit"
- Which seems clearly likely a guess, as opposed to anything referenced.
- Merely changed it back to its original form, with the same reference listed. "Clodfelter 2017, p. 249"
- Also, included the other above reference "John W. Chambers, II, ed. in chief, The Oxford Companion to American Military History. (Oxford University Press, 1999, ISBN 0-19-507198-0), 849 "
- Which is included in the United States military casualties of war page. 217.177.137.40 (talk) 15:08, 28 September 2025 (UTC)
Wiki Education assignment: First-Year Seminar - Shaping of the Modern World
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 August 2025 and 22 December 2025. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ilianatav (article contribs). Peer reviewers: SophiaNikishova.
— Assignment last updated by DocBui (talk) 18:33, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
Requested move 11 January 2026
- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: not moved. Withdrawn by proposer and unanimously opposed. (non-admin closure) Thanks, Glasspalace (talk • contribs) 04:08, 11 January 2026 (UTC)
Mexican–American War → Mexican-American War – It has now been several years since the last move discussion, so I feel it is time to bring this up again. No matter what some controversial editor did in 2011 or whatever, the fact is that this violates MOS:DASH. To use a few of a number of examples: Franco-Prussian War, Russo-Ukrainian war, Russo-Georgian War, etc.
Further, as it has been known already, almost no reliable sources use a dash instead of a hyphen. Red0ctober22 (talk) 01:29, 11 January 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose: "Franco-" and "Russo-" are different. They are combining forms. MOS:DUALNATIONALITIES, which is part of MOS:DASH, even has an explicit example ("Franco-British rivalry" preferred over "Franco–British rivalry). This case is more like another example, "French–British rivalry". — BarrelProof (talk) 02:16, 11 January 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose per BarrelProof. Thanks, Glasspalace (talk • contribs) 02:47, 11 January 2026 (UTC)
- After reviewing BarrelProof's argument I choose to withdraw. Red0ctober22 (talk) 04:08, 11 January 2026 (UTC)





