Jump to content

Talk:Mid-Atlantic gap: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Yobot (talk | contribs)
m Tagging, Removed: |nested=yes (2), using Project:AWB
Neutral POV?: new section
Line 24: Line 24:
==Merge==
==Merge==
In re merge, please comment [[Talk:Air Gap (Battle of the Atlantic)#Merge|here]]. For what it might look like, have a peek at [[User:Trekphiler/The Black Pit|this]], WIP. [[User:Trekphiler|<font color="#1034A6"><small>TREKphiler</small></font>]] [[User talk:Trekphiler|<font color="#1034A6"><sup><small>hit me ♠</small> </sup>]]</font> 14:21, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
In re merge, please comment [[Talk:Air Gap (Battle of the Atlantic)#Merge|here]]. For what it might look like, have a peek at [[User:Trekphiler/The Black Pit|this]], WIP. [[User:Trekphiler|<font color="#1034A6"><small>TREKphiler</small></font>]] [[User talk:Trekphiler|<font color="#1034A6"><sup><small>hit me ♠</small> </sup>]]</font> 14:21, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

== Neutral POV? ==

This appears very much to be written from a British point of view. How did Germany, or or the United States, or the Soviet Union, view the Mid-Atlantic Gap? The issue of submarines vs. merchant convoys in the Atlantic is extremely important to WWII. Beyond the glaring use of only a British perspective, I don't think the article gives due importance to the actions, consequences, perceptions, and planning of the other major players in the North Atlantic, nor to the issue of merchant shipping as a whole. It is as though a former British officer describes what happened from his perspective, without considering that other nations were involved and had their own perspectives, or that WWII was a complex global event rather than solely an assault on the UK.

Revision as of 07:28, 12 August 2011

Merge

In re merge, please comment here. For what it might look like, have a peek at this, WIP. TREKphiler hit me ♠ 14:21, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral POV?

This appears very much to be written from a British point of view. How did Germany, or or the United States, or the Soviet Union, view the Mid-Atlantic Gap? The issue of submarines vs. merchant convoys in the Atlantic is extremely important to WWII. Beyond the glaring use of only a British perspective, I don't think the article gives due importance to the actions, consequences, perceptions, and planning of the other major players in the North Atlantic, nor to the issue of merchant shipping as a whole. It is as though a former British officer describes what happened from his perspective, without considering that other nations were involved and had their own perspectives, or that WWII was a complex global event rather than solely an assault on the UK.