Talk:Third Battle of the Hook
Appearance
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Third Battle of the Hook article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | Military history: Asian / British / Chinese / European / Korean / North America / United States Start‑class | ||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | China: History Start‑class Mid‑importance | ||||||||||||
|
Untitled
The artillery shell counts can't be verified as there aren't any references listed. Math for the listed U.N. numbers don't add up to the stated total. RobNeal1 (talk) 19:12, 28 November 2007 (UTC)28Nov2007RobNeal1
- The shell count and much more are indeed verified by the source of much of this article, - the blow-by-blow contemporaneous account in the official War Diary published by the National Archives, London. Even the names of the wounded (some still alive) are listed, along with the nature of their wounds. The final DWR casualty listed was a regimental cook who broke an arm after falling into a trench in the darkness. It is the nature of an encyclopaedia article that it has to be presented in a summary format. Consequently, too many references can be a disadvantage, disrupting the article's readability, although these are inevitably subjective judgements on the editors part. There are sufficient references usually given to enable readers wishing to explore the topic in greater depth to do that. 5.70.185.69 (talk) 14:32, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
- Five years too late! If you know where the source comes from, please cite it. Using the [1] template doesn't distract from the readability and that is exactly the kind of fact that people sometimes feel they have to overelaborate or guess. Providing the source helps a great deal! -- Brigade Piron (talk) 14:36, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
- The shell count and much more are indeed verified by the source of much of this article, - the blow-by-blow contemporaneous account in the official War Diary published by the National Archives, London. Even the names of the wounded (some still alive) are listed, along with the nature of their wounds. The final DWR casualty listed was a regimental cook who broke an arm after falling into a trench in the darkness. It is the nature of an encyclopaedia article that it has to be presented in a summary format. Consequently, too many references can be a disadvantage, disrupting the article's readability, although these are inevitably subjective judgements on the editors part. There are sufficient references usually given to enable readers wishing to explore the topic in greater depth to do that. 5.70.185.69 (talk) 14:32, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
- ^ Ref
Categories:
- Start-Class military history articles
- Start-Class Asian military history articles
- Asian military history task force articles
- Start-Class British military history articles
- British military history task force articles
- Start-Class Chinese military history articles
- Chinese military history task force articles
- Start-Class European military history articles
- European military history task force articles
- Start-Class Korean military history articles
- Korean military history task force articles
- Start-Class North American military history articles
- North American military history task force articles
- Start-Class United States military history articles
- United States military history task force articles
- Start-Class China-related articles
- Mid-importance China-related articles
- Start-Class China-related articles of Mid-importance
- Start-Class Chinese history articles
- Mid-importance Chinese history articles
- WikiProject Chinese history articles
- WikiProject China articles