Battle of Honey Springs

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

France Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France 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.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Middle Ages Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages 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.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

In 2006 the region had 28,672 inhabitants,[Note 4] nearly half the total population of Charente-Maritime (47.9%).

The figure for half the population of Charente Maritime has to be incorrect. The department counts nearly half a million people and La Rochelle alone over 70,000.

suggest sentence reads:

In 2006 the region had 28,672 inhabitants,[Note 4] nearly half the total population of Charente-Maritime (47.9%).

80.254.147.52 (talk) 15:14, 18 July 2010 (UTC)Yves Pacaud[reply]

I'm sorry, but the quote and the suggestion say exactly the same thing, letter for letter. Can you be clearer what change you are actually suggesting? Si Trew (talk) 06:49, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It should have been 286,872 (at least according to French WP) – looks like a typo. I've fixed it. Si Trew (talk) 06:52, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone feel this entry's use of "notes" in ways not unlike listing your source, detracts from the already not very factual story, historically speaking. I can understand employing such annotation in the fashion of footnotes, to be used to cross reference specific subjects if this entry were the size of a single encyclopedic volume all by itself, however unless the entry is expected to grow a thousand times in length, I think this system of annotation does a great disservice to the articles clarity.Dirtclustit (talk) 22:00, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]