Talk:Convoy PQ 18

map - german wikipedia

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d7/PQ18-Karte-DE-1942.svg

Greetings from Germany - Rainer E. 84.150.20.206 (talk) 05:49, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Finnish Radio Intelligence

It should probably be mentioned that it was the Finnish radio intelligence that intercepted and deciphered the precise travel plan of the convoy. Reino Hallamaa got an Iron Cross because of that. -- 194.215.123.199 (talk) 10:46, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

LWD

I previously placed a link to the SIG data in the external links section of this article. You can take at look at it. It is clear from that data, which is drawn from Luftwaffe records that four I/KG26 He-111s were shot down which closely matches RN claims. The recent availability of Luftwaffe loss records makes Bekkers account obsolete, although still useful to fill in some details. Damwiki1 (talk) 02:56, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

CE and revision

Added citations and ce prose, changed ship templates to HMS 6, cites to sfn re: B1Keith-264 (talk) 12:11, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

The separate order of battle page Order of battle for Convoy PQ 18 is far more detailed and elaborate is there any point in the OOB section in this article? Keith-264 (talk) 00:54, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

I would ask why there is a separate page for the Order of Battle. I think it should be incorporated into the convoy page Lyndaship (talk) 10:54, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

The OOB page is quite elaborate, with wikitables etc, which I think justifies the separation or we'd have a massive OOB section in the article. (Did the editor intend to provide then for each Arctic convoy since other separate PQ oobs follow the same pattern?) I wonder about the one here. Woodman provides a lot of narrative detail which makes it practical to name the ships involved and their fate in the article, which could make the section redundant. If so the link will suffice. NB my edits to the article are strictly suggestive and I'm happy to discuss them. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 11:56, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Do what you think is best. I don't think separate OOB articles are appropriate for a convoy when the forces involved are just in the one action. There's only 5 convoy OOB articles listed Lyndaship (talk) 14:28, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

I favor combining the OOB and convoy battle description in a single article. Thewellman (talk) 15:27, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

I won't stand in anyone's way. ;O) Regards Keith-264 (talk) 16:21, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

I'm putting the ship names into the narrative and would like to see what effect this has on the article, to see if the merchant ship list at the end will still be necessary. I'm also adding some narrative detail from Woodman like the Pedestal article, see efn for Bullshit Bob ;o), hence the edit breaks in the Battle section. Keith-264 (talk) 14:40, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Been watching you working away. I'm a bit dubious about listing lots of ships in the text as it makes it difficult to read. It has been suggested to me that this is discouraged and referred to as "laundry listing". Tables are nice though! Lyndaship (talk) 14:50, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

It is looking a bit bulky isn't it? I'll try moving them to efns. Keith-264 (talk) 15:59, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Any better? Keith-264 (talk) 16:26, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

I like it better like that but do it the way which feels right for you Lyndaship (talk) 17:39, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, those bits are experimental so I'm open to suggestion, page watchers deserve a look in. I thought that when I put the ship details in at the top, lots of dupe links would show up further down but I was wrong. Keith-264 (talk) 17:52, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

I think that's enough for now; still open to opinion on form and content. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 10:57, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Recent edit

@Mikoyan21: Blanked temporarily your edit as the citations don't work. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 08:09, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Oh right, there was error in the link, fixed. Minor point but I'd rather keep the modified wording as now the Axis codebreaking efforts sound like a weirdly worded afterthought in a chapter which is all about ULTRA. --Mikoyan21 (talk) 21:40, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks babe, had I better sources on the German codebreaking effort it would have got its own section. Keith-264 (talk) 22:03, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Current state of the article is OK. --Mikoyan21 (talk) 18:30, 26 July 2018 (UTC)