Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/American logistics in the Western Allied invasion of Germany/archive1

SG review

• I don't know what a railhead is, and the term is used multiple times. We don't seem to have a relevant wikilink (railheading doesn't seem to work). It is probably a familiar term to MILHIST people, but is there a way to avoid this military jargon (?) in the lead ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:08, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

  Linked to the Wiktionary definition. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:04, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

• Is engulfed the best word here ? Were they stopped or surrounded ? "The American forces were then engulfed by the German offensives in the Ardennes and Alsace in December 1944 and January 1945." SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:08, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

  Some divisions were surrounded, such as the 101st Airborne Division at Bastogne, and the 106th Infantry Division at Schnee Eifel, resulting in the largest mass surrender in the ETO. The Ardennes battle had major ramifications back in the United States, where the last remaining divisions were rushed to Europe, including the 71st Infantry Division, which was trained for jungle warfare and staging for the Pacific. I am open to suggestions of a better word. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:04, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

• Is something wonky in the convert templates here ? Perhaps rounding or a setting ? "On one side of the river there was storage space for 120,000 long tons (120,000 t) of subsistence; the other side had facilities for the storage of 41,000 long tons (42,000 t) of petroleum, oil and lubricants (POL). The former had sidings for unloading 466 railway cars, and the latter for 352. There was closed storage for 3,200 long tons (3,300 t) of subsistence," ... if 41K long tons converts to 42K tons, and 3.2K long tons converts to 3.3K tons, how does 120K long tons convert to 120K tons ? Most likely a rounding setting, but reads very confusing. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:08, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

  Because 120,000 is rounded to four digits, while 41,000 is rounded to just three. Tweaked the rounding here. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:04, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

• A (significant?) portion of the "Replacing casualties" section seems to be general info that (would?) apply to more than the invasion of Germany. If that is the case, is there a sub-article somewhere (or could there be), to explain the generalities and help cut down on the size of this section ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:08, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

  I have cut back this section. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:04, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

• A 12,000 word article seems to warrant a longer lead. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:08, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

  Any ideas about what additional things it could say? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:04, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

  Another sentence from Outcome? More of an idea of what seems to be a massive scale, based on the Table of Contents? More about how much personnel maybe ? Just some ideas, not sure, but the lead doesn't leave me with a sense of "why do I care". But then I don't know what weight to give items that might be added ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:20, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

• "the Urft Dam (Urfttalsperre), which was filled to capacity with 45,500,000 cubic meters, and the Rur Dam (Schwammenauel), which was two-thirds full with 65,500,000 cubic meters." It's the reservoir that is filled to capacity; the dam is the structure that holds the reservoir ??? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:08, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

  Two dams, one filled to capacity. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:04, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

  Could you say the reservoir was filled to capacity (Urft Dam constrains the Urft river to make Urft Reservoir, and it's the reservoir that is at capacity). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:22, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

• There are about half a dozen instances of Class 40 and Class 70 bridges in the article, but they are unlinked and I don't know what they are ... Class 40 ?? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:08, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

• It goes back to the Great War, and a British engineer officer dealing with bridges that were too light and vehicles that were too heavy. He came up with the idea of labelling vehicles with their weight, and bridges with the maximum load they could bear. So all the people in the field had to do was match them up. Since then, the classification has became more complicated, and there is an app for it, but it works the same in the field. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:04, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

  You got that and the other terms fixed to my satisfaction ... I didn't feel overwhelmed by MilHist jargon anywhere else ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:23, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

That's my first quick look; if there is any chance of getting the page size below about 11,000 words, I'd be happy to read through in closer detail with an eye towards supporting, but I can guess that you probably know I don't typically support large articles. Let me know if I can offer more here, good luck, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:08, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

It doesn't seem likely with extra words added to the lead. What I can do is split the article into two smaller articles: American logistics in the Rhineland campaign and American logistics in the Central Europe campaign. The downside of this is that the article will no longer be congruent to the parent or the corresponding article on the British logistics. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:15, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

You know best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:29, 19 September 2023 (UTC)