Talk:Battle of Wareo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Battle of Wareo 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.
March 12, 2016 Good article nominee Listed
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Australia / Military history (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon Battle of Wareo is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history task force (marked as Low-importance).
Note icon
Need help improving this article? Ask a LibrarianWhat's this? at the National Library of Australia.
Note icon
The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to for other than editorial assistance.
WikiProject Military history (Rated GA-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.
GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality assessment scale.
WikiProject Japan / Military history (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 08:22, October 15, 2016 (JST, Heisei 28) (Refresh)
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This page is supported by the joint Japanese military history task force.

Suggestions for improvement[edit]

G'day, good work so far on this article. I've tried to expand the Background section a little, to put the battle in a bit more context. I have the following suggestions for further improves that would probably take it towards B class:

  • expand the lead to summarise the whole article;
    • this has been partially done, but as the article is in the process of being expanded, it will probably need more work later;AustralianRupert (talk) 22:19, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
      • I have added a bit more now, but if anyone feels it needs more, please feel free to expand it further. AustralianRupert (talk) 12:19, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
  • expand the Aftermath to provide more details about subsequent events and casualties;
    • this has been partially done, but it could probably stand to be expanded more; AustralianRupert (talk) 22:19, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
  • if available, add some more images, including a map if one exists that is in the public domain. AustralianRupert (talk) 13:21, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Having let this sit for a month, I have a couple more suggestions/comments:

  • having looked at the text that was added by the article's original contributor using the NSW Lancers Memorial Museum as a source, I've become concerned that some parts of the original article might be too similar to the source. While I'm sure that this was just an honest mistake, it needs to be rewritten. I am in the process of trying to go through the Horace's Ears and Kalung Lakes section to reword the information that was added from this source, but it is a bit of a slow process. If anyone else can help out, I would greatly appreciate it;
    • I think I have taken care of this now, but further eyes on would be good. AustralianRupert (talk) 12:19, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
  • expand the reference base: I will be able to add information from Dexter, but at the moment that is the only other source I have. John Coates' Bravery Above Blunder might have something and so might Mark Johnston's The Magnificent 9th. I will try to get these from the library, but anyone else has these sources (or any others), please feel free to start working on the article;
    • I've added the small amount that Johnston mentions, but am still waiting on Coates to arrive from the library. AustralianRupert (talk) 12:19, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
  • add a section discussing the 20th Brigade's advance from Nongora to the Christmas Hills and Lakes;
  • add a section discussing the 26th Brigade's advance on Wareo from Sattelberg: there were really three drives (as per the map on p. 660 in Dexter);
  • I wonder if the article should not be called "Battle of Wareo–Gusika", as it was essentially an advance through that whole area. Does anyone have any thoughts on this? AustralianRupert (talk) 22:19, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
    • I propose that the article be renamed to the above. Does anyone disagree with this? AustralianRupert (talk) 12:19, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Under Logistics maybe "unloading sheltered areas" should be "sheltered unloading areas"? Under Drive on Kuanko and Wareo "The lead company from the 2/23rd Infantry Battalion then exploited towards the river, looking for a crossing. " - should that be "explored towards the river"?SpoolWhippets (talk) 06:01, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
    • G'day, thanks for taking a look. I've tweaked the article in regards to the first point. In relation to the second, I've left as is for the time being, although I wouldn't mind hearing what others have to say. My understanding is that the word "exploited" in this regard is a term of art used in these situations, although no doubt "explored" would also work here. Thanks for your suggestions. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 08:41, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
    • Great work guys, AustralianRupert and SpoolWhippets. I threw the original together, with limited resources as I was disapointed there wasn't a page for this battle - glad you have expanded it and corrected it, added more sources. Cheers! Deathlibrarian (talk) 12:28, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Small hospital ships[edit]

The two small hospital ships Stradbroke II (AH-169), operated by Australian Army Small Ships, and Narob (S-206), operated under the U.S. Army Small Ships Section largely by Australians, get brief and almost exclusive mention here. Both were former yachts. I can find enough in U.S. sources on Narob to squeeze a paragraph or two, perhaps for some sort of list entry, but Stradbroke II is another matter. Search here shows a few bits and pieces at AWM, having two organizations mentioned that are also lightly or not covered: "ARMY VESSEL AH169 "STRADBROKE 2" OPERATED BY 12TH AUSTRALIAN SMALL SHIPS COMPANY. THE VESSEL OPERATES AS A HOSPITAL SHIP OF THE 1ST AUSTRALIAN AMBULANCE CONVOY." One of the few hits on Stradbroke II of recent vintage shows the Classic Yacht Association of Australia has a Stradbroke II Trophy with a brief history of the yacht. In addition there is a mention from 1930 of the yacht being used to survey the Great Barrier Reef and an earlier one on launch. Further, the Dr. A. J. Ross, owner at one time, has an "interesting" history with rumors of drug smuggling using the vessel. Interesting little ships with organizations largely lost in the clutter of larger history. Australians? Any local resources that could fill the gaps a bit? Hard copy resources? Perhaps these little hospital ships could at least get paragraphs in one of the listings here. Palmeira (talk) 12:12, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Why don't you create Wikipedia article on the Stradbroke II? You could illustrate it with the Australian War Memorial image and use the information from these sites as sources. (Brian Alsop's Australian Army Watercraft also contains some information.) You could then link to this page from the Wareo article. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:58, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
Not really enough on line to do more than create another permanent stub, two short paragraphs at most. Then we might find "notability" police getting upset. That is why I am hoping some of you in Australia might turn up a bit more, perhaps in hard copy sources. The same applies to Norab, beyond the yacht's rather colorful owner, as far as I have found in a bit of searching. AWM's photo captions seem to be the limit of on line information for both vessels there. If you think there is enough in Alsop's work (not on line and Worldcat shows the closest to me is 3,600 miles across in London) to flesh out the bare bones from the links above (they are about "it" from on line search) then perhaps I'll take the time to do a "skeleton" for you or someone with that reference to flesh out.
As for the external links there seems a difference of opinion that they are "not allowed" even when there is no reasonable internal link alternative. My opinion is simply that if this thing is to inform readers such links should be available to do so. Otherwise this seems to be some sort of self admiration club hostile to to actually informing the reader from external sources. Palmeira (talk) 12:34, 10 April 2014 (UTC)