Talk:Battle of the Pusan Perimeter

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Battle of the Pusan Perimeter article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Battle of the Pusan Perimeter has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
September 21, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed
January 23, 2012	WikiProject A-class review	Approved

Current status: Good article

Military history: Asian / Korean / North America / United States / Cold War A‑class

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.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

A

This article has been rated as A-class on the project's quality scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Asian military history task force
	Korean military history task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	Cold War task force (c. 1945 – c. 1989)

Additional information:
/
	This article has passed an A-Class review.

Korea High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a collaborative effort to build and improve articles related to Korea. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how use this banner, please refer to the documentation.KoreaWikipedia:WikiProject KoreaTemplate:WikiProject KoreaKorea-related articles

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated working groups:
/
	This article is supported by the Korean military history task force.
	This article is supported by WikiProject North Korea.

United States High‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cold War High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cold War, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Cold War 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.Cold WarWikipedia:WikiProject Cold WarTemplate:WikiProject Cold WarCold War articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Confusing Army and Air Force reference

Even thought it is referenced, I find this statement very difficult to believe: "Several hundred fighter-bombers of the Fifth Air Force were positioned just off the coast aboard the USS Valley Forge and the USS Philippine Sea". The U.S. Navy's Task Force 77, commanded from the USS Valley Forge, carried U.S. Navy air groups on each of its two carriers, not U.S. Air Force aircraft. In addition, the two carriers would have carried, at most, two hundred aircraft (100 per carrier), not "several hundred". The author of the statement may be confused by the fact that the USS Valley Forge carried Carrier Air Wing Five, while the U.S. Air Force aircraft in the region were under the Fifth Air Force. Darkstar8799 (talk) 18:34, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've clarified this to indicate that aircraft were off the coast and aboard the carriers, since many of the USAF aircraft were in Japan. —Ed!^(talk) 15:48, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yongsan references are wrong?

The references to Yongsan must be wrong, but I don't know what is the correct location (yet, at least). The only Yongsan I can find is way up by Seoul, and since this is way down south, it must refer to something else, a typo on the Army's part. wbfergus 15:07, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The changes between English and Korean are always an issue, the Yongsan referred to in the article is actually Yangsan about 40 minutes north of Pusan on the Nakdong river (the name is spelled Yangsan, Yongsan, and even Yeongsan depending on the transition and the forms that are used.

Winterrider (talk) 13:26, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image Bias

Every single one of the pictures of troops is of US forces. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.106.45.147 (talk) 01:30, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have been looking for more sources of images, but the only ones I can use without copyright violation are those from the US Army + government sources. If you can find more images we can use for the other side, please let me know where! Thanks, —Ed!^(talk) 03:46, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bias much

It wasn't just American troops that died in the battle a lot of Korean and British soldiers also died. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davido488 (talk • contribs) 22:32, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I recently corrected this. Unfortunately it took scanning through paper clippings to find any answers. Only a small number of British troops were casualties though, comparatively. —Ed!^(talk) 03:49, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Official British history did not report significant combat activities for Commonwealth forces until September 20, yet by then the Pusan battle had already ended...me think someone has taken himself a tad bit too serious. Jim101 (talk) 01:29, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Map needed

May I respectfully submit that an article on the Pusan Perimeter that lacks a map of the entire peninsula (thus providing context to the area of which the article speaks), is not only doing a disservice, but is missing the whole frigging point. 98.82.84.209 (talk) 17:50, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Added two maps of the entire peninsula. —Ed!^(talk) 18:01, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, kind Ed. 98.82.84.209 (talk) 23:15, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non-American UN Forces at Pusan

There's evidence given for UK forces in combat at Pusan. However, the reference given for Commonwealth and Dutch participation just says they contributed some ships at one point, without giving any detail as to their role or when they arrived on-station. I looked for detail on the Canadian contribution and I found that a group of three destroyers was sent, but the only info I can find indicates that they might have participated in escorting troops to Pusan for no more than twelve days at most (perhaps; the info also mentions that at least one ship wase held in reserve for rescue purposes), but never fought there. The Australian ground forces arrived immediately after Pusan; the Canadians in December; New Zealand in January. I can find no info whatsoever on the Netherlands, other than that they wound up in Korea eventually. Australian No. 77 Squadron definitely participated, so Australia fits.

Is there any grounds at this time for listing New Zealand, Canada, and the Netherlands as combatants in this battle? Palindromedairy (talk) 11:46, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]