Talk:Mid-Atlantic gap

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Language[edit]

The language in this article is poor, to the point of hampering understanding. It needs a thorough cleanup. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asgrrr (talkcontribs) 00:48, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merge[edit]

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?[edit]

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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.252.65.65 (talk) 07:28, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The issue was mainly British & Canadian. NPOV doesn't necessarily mean "cover every POV", AFAIK. The U.S. view would be much the same. Should there be more on the U.S. & German actions, yeah. TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 12:45, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Map would be Nice[edit]

Exactly where is the gap?155.97.53.72 (talk) 05:10, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Azores[edit]

Project Habakkuk says that permission to launch planes from the Azores is what closed the gap. -- Beland (talk) 00:30, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That page is wrong, & has been corrected. TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 07:18, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]