Talk:Capture of Liège (1702)

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

Military history: Dutch / European / 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. 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: /  Dutch military history task force European military history task force Early Modern warfare task force (c. 1500 – c. 1800) Belgium Low‑importance Belgium portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belgium, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Belgium 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. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Did you know nomination

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that in 1702, Anglo-Dutch forces assaulted the city of Liège while under fire from 72 cannon, 50 howitzers and mortars, and 250 hand mortars?

• Source: Wijn 1956, p. 186.

• ALT1: ... that although the 1702 capture of Liège left Anglo-Dutch forces dominant in the Low Countries, their commander was still dissatisfied? Source: Churchill 1936, p. 605.
• ALT2: ... that during the 1702 siege of Liège, the leading engineer was so angered by a colleague's disobedience he threatened to abandon the siege? Source: Wijn 1956, p. 185.
• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Škoda 26 T

Created by DavidDijkgraaf (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 76 past nominations.

~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:48, 10 September 2025 (UTC).[reply]