Talk:Normandy landings/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Peacemaker67 (talk · contribs) 11:42, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. |
| |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. |
| |
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | ||
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | ||
2c. it contains no original research. | ||
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | ||
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | ||
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | ||
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | ||
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | ||
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. |
| |
7. Overall assessment. | Listed, great job! |
- Order of Battle: I have rearranged the material regarding the defenses on the Cotentin Peninsula using the map on p. 22 of Goldstein et al.
If it will still be too confusing, perhaps I should remove the units that were not directly involved on D-Day itself. What's your opinion?I have removed the other units stationed further west on the Cotentin. Regarding the 914th Arty Regt, that was a typo, Ford & Zaloga states 352nd Artillery Regiment (p.63). I have added more citations as to where the data came from for all the units. Regarding who controlled which armoured reserve divisions (Hitler, Rommel, Geyr), none of the books I have available locally contain that information, but I will keep looking. I am willing to put the data in a table if you think that's necessary but looking over other orders of battle (Kursk, Juno Beach, and El Alamein are the ones I looked at) none of them seem to be in tables, so I am having trouble visualising how this would work out. Regarding the German divisional areas, I have reorganised the content; please see if this is better. - Regarding who had control of what reserves, it's not covered in the sources I have here, and it's kinda a moot point anyway, as Hitler would have final approval regardless.
- Subordinate formations of Army Group B:
I can't see where these were involved in D-Day itself, except for 21st Panzers.Added -- Diannaa (talk)
- Under operational control of 21st Army Group (Montgomery): This is mentioned right below the header "Allied order of battle". my mistake
- 6th Airborne Division: Ford & Zaloga shows them as part of British 1 Corps (p 200) and I can find nothing in the other source books that contradict this.
- Lead has been expanded; I will look it over again later and see what else needs doing. -- Diannaa (talk) 20:44, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
- I think the lead is okay now; please see if you agreee. -- Diannaa (talk) 00:43, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
- I agree, listed. Well done! Peacemaker67 (send... over) 01:25, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you so much for a great review and for helping with this important project. Best, -- Diannaa (talk) 01:33, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
- I agree, listed. Well done! Peacemaker67 (send... over) 01:25, 5 June 2014 (UTC)