This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

British Empire Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject British Empire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of British Empire 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.British EmpireWikipedia:WikiProject British EmpireTemplate:WikiProject British EmpireBritish Empire Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Military history: British / European / North America / United States / Early Modern 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 Associated task forces: /  British military history task force European military history task force North American military history task force United States military history task force Early Modern warfare task force (c. 1500 – c. 1800) United States: North Carolina Low‑importance 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject North Carolina (assessed as Low-importance).

First paragraph in the Background section ends abruptly in an incomplete sentence. Wasn't sure what was going to be said there. Could probably guess, but not completely certain. -- JoannaSerah (talk) 01:41, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

fixed. thanks -- InspectorTiger (talk) 16:05, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The categories listed currently include Category:Conflicts in 1707 and Category:1707 in the Thirteen Colonies. Should that really be Category:Conflicts in 1711 and Category:1711 in the Thirteen Colonies or should we have both those dates listed? The way the article reads now, it seems more appropriate to put in 1711, but since it is somewhat of a range of times, wanted to find out what others thought. Thank you. -- JoannaSerah (talk) 17:47, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

yes i quite agree. 1711 is much more appropriate. I didn't give the categories a close look when I was expanding the article. --InspectorTiger (talk) 04:10, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]