A fact from Battle of Vyazma appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 28 October 2006. The text of the entry was as follows: Did you know... that the Battle of Vyazma (pictured) had a disconcerting impact on the entire Grande Armée, as it spread disorder to the center of Napoleon’s long retreating column of troops? A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2006/October.

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on November 3, 2011, November 3, 2012, November 3, 2014, November 3, 2015, and November 3, 2018.

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

Russia: History / Military Mid‑importance 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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the history of Russia task force. This article is supported by the Russian, Soviet, and CIS military history task force. Military history: European / French / German / Russian & Soviet / Napoleonic era 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 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 not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  European military history task force French military history task force German military history task force Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force Napoleonic era task force (c. 1792 – 1815)

This is a confusing section title because there are two commanders with the name Eugene fighting in this battle:

• Eugène de Beauharnais
• Eugene (prince/Duke) of Württemberg

Better to use their family names or titles in the text to reduce the chances of confusion. --Philip Baird Shearer 10:58, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your input is noted. The article will edited and improved in the near future in order to make it more readable.

Kenmore 15:56, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Helm of the column? I think the word would be "van". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Terry Thorgaard (talk • contribs) 02:47, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

According to Józef Zajączek biography I am reading (Jadwiga Nadzieja (1988). Od Jakobina do księcia namiestnika. Wydawnictwo "Śląsk". ISBN 978-83-216-0682-8., p.212-213), Józef Poniatowski was wounded and from 1 November Zajączek commanded the corps. In her description of the Vyazm battle, she is pretty clear that Zajączek was still in command of the V corps. Yet this article seems to refer to Poniatowski as the V Corps commander, and doesn't even mention Zajączek. I don't have access to Poniatowski's bio to verify this right now, but this fact (that he was wounded and replaced by Zajączek) is confirmed in our unref bio of Poniatowski, as well as in his Polish Wiki bio. As such, I think this article is mistaken when making references to Poniatowski; if this is indeed how it is written in the secondary sources cited in this article, then we have a source material inconsistency. PS. Since Poniatowski was wounded just two days before the battle, some sources may refer to his corps and decisions correctly up to this point; my concern is for the battle part, when (on 3 November) the corps was already commanded by Zajączek for ~2 days, and Poniatowski was no longer in command. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 21:27, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kenmore replies:

My sources did not mention this information about Poniatowski, but I believe what you are saying. I am very eager to read Nadzieja's account of the Vyazma battle; is it available in English, or are you willing to translate the Polish passages to Russian? Please see my reply to your Krasnoi comments. Kenmore (talk) 01:20, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Kenmore: I don't have access to N. book ATM (will do so in few weeks). For now my primary concern is to correct the error in who was the commander of the V Corps. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:06, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am failing this due to at least one error (see above), and a number of unreferenced claims (I count many unreferenced sentences). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 21:54, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It turns out that it's not an error, after all. I checked Riehn again today, and he says nothing about Zajaczek. It turns out that Zajaczek was temporarily replacing Poniatowski at the time of this battle. This fact could be added to the article in the form of a footnote, but it's probably unreasonable to refer to the V Corps as Zajaczek's corps.

Also, upon reading this article again today, it seems to me that most of my claims are, in fact, referenced. Please show me some examples of "unreferenced claims." Kenmore (talk) 10:11, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kenmore replies:

Let's discuss how we can add this new information (Poniatowski's absence) to the article. But let's not forget that this new data does nothing to change my chief point, which is the simple, undeniable truth: the V Corps was forced to retreat because it was compromised by the Russian advance.Kenmore (talk) 01:40, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have no qualms with that, through please note that the P. vs. Z. question only one of a number of issues that prevent this article from being rated as B-class. For the article to advance to B-class, all paragraphs must sport a reference (and when numerous sources where used for a paragraph, individual sentences should have their own references). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:08, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If anyone's interested in helping me upgrade the article, send me a message. Putting together a "clean up" list of improvement ideas would be a nice start.Kenmore (talk) 01:46, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I rewrote the original paragraph today, hoping to turn it into a good, readable, factually informative synopsis of the historical event at hand. I hope this version of the introduction stands permanently. Here it is, just for reference:

The Battle of Vyazma (November 3, 1812), occurred at the beginning of Napoleon’s retreat from Moscow. In this encounter a Russian force commanded by General Miloradovich inflicted heavy losses on the rear guard of the Grande Armee. Although the French thwarted Miloradovich's goal of encircling and destroying the corps of Marshal Davout, they withdrew in a partial state of disorder due to ongoing Russian harassment and heavy artillery bombardments. The French reversal at Vyazma, although indecisive, was significant due its damaging impact on several corps of Napoleon's retreating army.[1]

Hope everyone's happy with this version.Kenmore (talk) 23:47, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Heads up to any editors following this article's development: I replaced one map with a new one. The prior map was the interactive map inserted by Ruedi33a. The new one is taken directly from the West Point Military Academy Atlas of the Napoleonic Wars. I believe there are many advantages to the West Point map, and that we should stick with that one for the article. I've saved the coding to Ruedi33a's original interactive map, in case anyone thinks there's a better place to insert it. Please contact me with any suggestions or ideas.Kenmore (talk) 15:57, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]