Talk:Battle of Hanau

Germany Low‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany 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.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: European / French / German / Napoleonic era

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:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion 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
	Napoleonic era task force (c. 1792 – 1815)

B-Class[edit]

if the lead is expanded, this will definitely pass the B-Class. Cam (Chat) 02:13, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Concur. --Rosiestep (talk) 04:39, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strategic French victory[edit]

This is a much more appropriate label for the outcome of this battle, given the strategic goals of the two commanders. De Wrede needed to bar Napoleon's way until the Army of Bohemia could come in from behind the Grande Armee and smash the Emperor. Meanwhile, Napoleon simply needed to clear his way towards Frankfurt, so, for him, beating De Wrede was just a means to an end, which is why he didn't follow him after winning the battle.--Alexandru Demian (talk) 00:43, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]