Talk:Battle of Broodseinde

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Military history (Rated B-Class)
MILHIST 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.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality assessment scale.
WikiProject Germany (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Possible improvements[edit]

This is article is very close to B class in my opinion, however, I have a couple of suggestions:

  • Referencing: generally very good, however, there are a couple of paragraphs without cites. The rule for the military history project is that for a B class rating every paragraph requires at least one citation, more if multiple assertions are made;
  • WP:MOS issues:
    • the citations need to go outside, or after punctuation.Yes check.svg Done
    • in this case I believe the spelling should be British English, not American English, but I'm not tied to it. Yes check.svg Done
    • dashes: use endashs and emdashes where appropriate;Yes check.svg Done
    • images: try to avoid stacking images, this can be resolved by putting some of them on the left;Yes check.svg Done
    • headings: don't use 'The' in the title for headings, don't ask me why, the Manual of Style just doesn't like itYes check.svg Done
    • citations: duplicate references (i.e. same source and page number) can be consolidated using WP:NAMEDREFSYes check.svg Done
    • date format: there is a mixture of the American (month, day) and British (day month) system. Need to be consistent. I believe, as above with spelling, that as the beligerents involved are mainly British and Commonwealth nations that it should follow the British system, however, once again I'm not tied to it so long as there is consistency either way.Yes check.svg Done
    • date linking: as per WP:MOSNUM we don't wikilink dates anymore.Yes check.svg Done

That is all I have at the moment. Looking good so far. — AustralianRupert (talk) 07:06, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I've gone through and made these tweaks, also did a bit of formating and copyediting. There are still a couple of citations missing (I have put tags where I feel they are required). If these can be added in, I feel that the article would be a B class. If you would like to take the article higher, please consider submitting it for a peer review. This can be done by adding it to the list at WP:MHPR. Hope this helps. — AustralianRupert (talk) 04:06, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Interesting views of the genesis of Broodseinde.[edit]

Paragraph moved from text[edit]

Had the artillery been closer, it would have been possible for the advance to have continued. However, as some of the artillery was already at its extreme range,[1] the plan would have had to have been modified to address this possibility prior to the attack. As it was, there was discussion between Generals Godley (II Anzac Corps commander), Charteris (Head of Intelligence at BEF HQ), Plumer (Second Army commander) and Birdwood (I Anzac Corp commander) as to the possibility of further attacks on 4 October (with Godley and Charteris wanting to go on but Birdwood and Plumer arguing against).[2] By mid-afternoon it was decided that no further attacks would take place.[3]

Exposition from OH used to add detail.Keith-264 (talk) 11:17, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

This removed from Poelcappelle as occurred on 4 Oct "despite the 11th Division brigade having eight tanks of D Battalion Tank Corps".Keith-264 (talk) 20:36, 6 July 2012 (UTC) The attack by the X Corps achieved most of its objectives (advancing 800 yards (730 m)), although unsubdued German artillery fire from behind the Ghevulelt Plateau caused large numbers of casualties (8,000 casualties in the three attacking divisions).[4] IX Corps in the south experienced the same problems as the X Corps and made little headway against the German defence.Keith-264 (talk) 09:05, 10 July 2012 (UTC)


I have revised the text and rearranged certain parts to conform to the model on other pages. Some additions have been made and others are due. If anyone wants to review the page and make suggestions, please do. Regards, Keith-264 (talk) 12:48, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Items moved from main page[edit]

On 12 October Rupprecht wrote, "Witterungsumschlag. Erfreulicherweise Regen, unser wirksamter Bundesgenosse." ("Break in the weather. Welcome rain, our strongest ally".)[5] On 18 October General von Kuhl proposed a bigger withdrawal. Sixt von Armin the German Fourth Army commander and Lossberg his Chief of Staff, felt that they had no alternative but to hang on[6]16:53, 18 July 2012 (UTC)


The revised version has been done in time for the anniversary, save for a copyedit. Suggestions etc requested as usual.Keith-264 (talk) 21:14, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Had a read through and tidied a few typos and awkward sentences but a fresh pair of eyes would be appreciated. Thanks.Keith-264 (talk) 10:15, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
    • ^ Cite error: The named reference Bean866 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
    • ^ Pedersen, Pg. 260
    • ^ Bean, Pg. 869
    • ^ Cite error: The named reference PW135 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
    • ^ Rupprecht, II, 271 in Falls, C. The Great War 1914–1918 (1961) p. 302.
    • ^ Der Weltkrieg in Terraine, J. The Road...., pp. 303–304.