Talk:American logistics in the Normandy campaign/GA1

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Vami IV (talk · contribs) 19:47, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Opening statement

Hello, and come what may from this review, thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. During the review, I may make copyedits, which I will limit to spelling correction and minor changes to punctuation (removal of double spaces and such). I will only make substantive edits that change the flow and structure of the prose if I previously suggested and it is necessary. The Nominator(s) should understand that I am a grammar pedant, and I will nitpick in the interest of prose quality. For responding to my comments, please use  Done,  Fixed,  Added,  Not done,  Doing..., or  Removed, followed by any comment you'd like to make. I will be crossing out my comments as they are redressed, and only mine. A detailed, section-by-section review will follow. —♠Vami_IV†♠ 19:47, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

@Hawkeye7: We begin. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 17:33, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Article size

Considering the size of this article, which I consider justified by the magnitude of the topic, the reviewee should know this will take a while. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 19:47, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

I will still make some suggestions here and there with the intent of chopping away bytes from the article size. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 11:19, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

I don't think that is necessary or desirable. The article is not excessively long, and parallels British logistics in the Normandy campaign. It is rewritten as a featured article, which requires comprehensive coverage of the subject area. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:14, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Lead

• of whom 459,511 part of the COMZ were part

• Y Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:47, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

• Mulberry artificial port Expand the wikilink here to cover all three words.

• Y Linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:47, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

• weeks after the D-Day Axe "the".

• Y Axed. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:47, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

• the advance was much slower than the Operation Overlord anticipated Rephrase.

• Y Rephrased. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:47, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

• wear and tear, damage Aren't these one and the same?

• Y War and tear is damage that naturally and inevitably occurs as a result of normal usage; changed the second part to "and accidents". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:47, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

• The comma between wear and tear and and accidental damage should be removed.
• [...]; that to continue the pursuit beyond the Seine had long-term and far-reaching effects. Confusing.
  • ? Seems clear enough. What is the confusion between? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:47, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
    • It feels like part of a edited out sentence stapled to the back of another. The complete ensemble confuses me because of how abrupt the change is: The decision to abandon plans to develop the ports of Brittany left the American forces with only the port of Cherbourg and the Normandy beaches for their maintenance; that to continue the pursuit beyond the Seine had long-term and far-reaching effects.
      • That's what a semicolon does: staple two related clauses together. The subject is understood. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:41, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
        • Just break it off into a new sentence. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 00:30, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

          Y Re-worded. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:08, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

• [...] to stall the American advance. Changed "to stall" to "stalled".

  Y The infinitive is correct here. Sentence re-phrased to allow "stalled" to be used. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:47, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Background

• Before World War II, the United States had developed War Plan Black for the possibility of a war with Germany. Can you give a date range for this?

• Y It dates back to before the Great War, but the relevant part is the work done in the 1920s and 1930s. Added this. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:47, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

• Chaney opened SPOBS headquarters at US Embassy at 1 Grosvenor Square, A "the" is needed before "SPOBS" and "US Embassy".

• Y Only the second one is required. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:47, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

• Marshall and Harry L. Hopkins Give us the latter man's job title.

• Y Didn't have one. Added the usual description "presidential advisor". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:47, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

• one of whom was selected by Somervell and Lee for Lee's SOS headquarters Is this man important enough to be mentioned here?

• Not one man, but one man from each branch. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:47, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

• (OPD) This is the only time this abbreviation is used in the article, so it should be removed.

• Y Removed. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:47, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

• British Army's Scottish Command and Western Command; Change to "Scottish and Western Command" for brevity and consistency with British Northern and Eastern Commands;

• Y Changed. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:47, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

• British Southern and South Eastern Commands "South Eastern Command" needs a wikilink.

• Y It hasn't got an article, so it is a red link. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:47, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

• It's not South-Eastern District (British Army)? I see that it was disbanded in 1903, but the article is also rather underdeveloped; this command must have existed during the War, I'd think. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 11:07, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

• As it turns out, no it is indeed not. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 11:17, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

  The South Eastern Command existed during the Second World War. It was formed in January 1942 and disbanded in November 1944. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:33, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Bolero

• The section jumps into Bolero without first giving a short explanation of what it was. "Background" gives some context for it, but not enough (and obtained the approval of the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and the British Chiefs of Staff Committee for what became known as Operation Bolero, the buildup of US forces in the UK with the aim of eventually mounting a cross-channel attack.

  That's all it was. What more should it say? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:21, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

  • What was Bolero? Where did it come from? Who were its masterminds? Needn't be more than a sentence. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 04:55, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

    Y The quoted sentence tells you all that. Operation Bolero was the buildup of US forces in the UK, and the mastermind was George Marshall. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:45, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

• Second Claridge Conference Can you elaborate on what this?

  Y A series of meetings of the Combined Chiefs at Claridge's in London in July 1942. Deleted Conference name. The important point was that the decision was taken to undertake Torch instead of Sledgehammer, which makes Roundup impossible, and causes Overlord to occur in 1944. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:45, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

• proposed 1942 cross-channel attack (Operation Sledgehammer) [...] invasion of French Northwest Africa (Operation Torch) [...] prospective 1943 cross-channel attack (Operation Roundup) I advise the combining of these into linked prose, rather than sequestered links, to take a bit out of the total article size.

  Y Substituted parenthetical commas for parentheses. Linked prose is undesirable, because we need the codenames later one (and they are more familiar to the causal reader of military history). Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:45, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

• This postponement, primary to gain extra month's production [...] Change "primary" to something else.

  Y Typo. Should be "primarily". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:45, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Organization

• Another organization activated on 7 February, far more important as it turned out, was the Advance Section (ADSEC), under the command of Colonel Ewart G. Plank. Condense.

  Y Deleted "far more important as it turned out" Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:45, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Planning

• 100 measurement tons (110 cubic metres) per day was set aside were set aside?

  Y Hmmm. Changed. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:06, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Assault

• Operation of the beachheads assigned to the was assigned.

  Y Well spotted. Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:06, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

• carrying at least [...] and often more. Latter is made redundant by "at least".

  Y Deleted "and often more". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:06, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Shipping

• during the first ninety days "ninety" should be a numeral per MOS:NUMERAL

   Not done MOS:NUMERAL: Integers greater than nine expressible in one or two words may be expressed either in numerals or in words. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:06, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

• British Brigadier G. C. Blacker Brigadier General?

  Y The rank of brigadier general was abolished in the British Army in 1922, and replaced by the lesser rank of brigadier. Linked Brigadier (United Kingdom)

• A consolidated Class V (ammunition) dump This designation never comes up again in the article; just call it an ammo dump.

  Y That's interesting. I must have tried to keep the jargon down. Done. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:06, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

• Cargo nets were spread out on the deck, and cargo piled on them. The cargo net with cargo inside was then lifted over the side on the ship's boom, and deposited in a waiting craft. Condense.

  Y Trimmed. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:06, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

• amphibious truck, known as Delete this comma.

  Y Deleted. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:06, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

• In some cases, DUKWs ran out of fuel. When this happened, their pumps failed, and they sank. Any idea how many DUKWs were lost to this? I won't count it against the article if 'no'.

  I regret that I don't have that information. I've looked though the official histories, and the reports of the 1st ESB and Provisional Engineer Group, but did not find figures for DUKW losses. Unsure if a breakdown by cause exists. Other duck losses were caused by rough seas, striking mines and underwater obstacles, and being run down by landing craft. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:06, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

• and occasionally causing one to capsize. One DUKW? The unloading craft suggests 'no', so I suggest "one" with "unloading craft".

  Y Changed to "them". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:06, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

• This was resolved only when started being loaded with one category of supply only. Confusing. Resolved when DUKWs began being loaded with one category?

  Y Missing word. This was resolved only ships when started being loaded with one category of supply only. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:06, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

• Cargo deposited on the beach at low tide and if not swiftly cleared was likely to be swamped by the rising tide. was deposited.

  Y Added missing word. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:06, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Mulberry harbor

• and there were normally only two quiet spells of good weather four days running between May and September. for four days, or of four days?

  Y Added "for" Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:24, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

• and you had to go out another one-half a mile Rewrite.

  Y Rewritten. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:24, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

• but by October 1943 COSSAC was planning for two, with a second one at Saint-Laurent in the American sector. Condense.

  Y Condensed. 01:24, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

• Who are the Seabees?

  From the linked article: "United States Naval Construction Battalions, better known as the Navy Seabees, form the U.S. Naval Construction Force (NCF). The Seabee nickname is a heterograph of the first letters "C B" from the words Construction Battalion." Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:24, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Right, can you just say as much in the prose? –♠Vami_IV†♠ 03:02, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

• ponton causeways 10 June [...] The first pontoon cause Pontoon causeways. On 10 June.

  Y US English uses "ponton". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:24, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

I'm a lifelong resident of the USA and have never seen nor heard that spelling. At any rate, can you link Pontoon bridge, too? —Vami

Y From that article: "The spelling "ponton" in English dates from at least 1870. The use continued in references found in U.S. patents during the 1890s. It continued to be spelled in that fashion through World War II, when temporary floating bridges were used extensively throughout the European theatre. U.S. combat engineers commonly pronounced the word "ponton" rather than "pontoon" and U.S. military manuals spelled it using a single 'o'. The U.S. military differentiated between the bridge itself ("ponton") and the floats used to provide buoyancy ("pontoon")." Linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:04, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Ordnance

• The storm prompted emergency action. The storm discussed in "Mulberry harbor"?

  Y Yes. Changed to "The 19 June storm". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:24, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Subsistence

• The D-ration was chocolate bar. A chocolate bar.

  Y added indefinite article. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:24, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

• which was unfortunate as it was those rations' primary sources of vitamin C. Delete "which was unfortunate" and move the rest to the front of the sentence. A la: The lemon powder in the C and K rations, their primary sources of vitamin C, was particularly unpopular with the troops, who frequently discarded it or used it for things like scrubbing floors.

  Y Deleted. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:24, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

POL

• but it was found that both east and west moles both the east and west

  Y added indefinite article (although I don't think it is needed.) Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:24, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

• was being decanted were being

  Y Changed. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:24, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

• of POL products by then "Products" is redundant.

  Y Deleted. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:24, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Base organization

• subordinated to First Army [...] Indeed, First Army [...] when Twelfth United States Army Group and Third Army the First Army, the Twelfth [..] and Third

  Y Added to multiple instances. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:19, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

• with tents to accommodation 11,000 personnel accommodate.

  Y Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:19, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

• The last sentence of the second paragraph would be better after the first.

  Y Moved. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:19, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

• and then a Le Mans at?

  Y Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:19, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Railways

• so they were unloaded in the stream Which stream?

  It's a nautical term. It means to unload on open water rather than at a dock, wharf, jetty or quay. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:08, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

• French civilians were employed whenever possible. For what?

  Y On the railways. Added a bit. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:08, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

• was initially restricted to hospital trains, and engineer supplies, and civil affairs relief. Too many "and"s.

  Y Deleted one. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:08, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Motor transport

• ETOUSA has disapproved this had disapproved of this

  This is the transitive form of the verb disapprove. Common in military usage. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:34, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

  This is not the military. (EDIT: I mean this literally). –♠Vami_IV†♠ 01:28, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

  Slightly different meaning though. An insurance claim can be disapproved even though you may still approve of it. This is the one we want. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:10, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

  It appears my brain broke when I first looked at this bit of prose because I thought it said "ETOUSA disapproves this". Anyway, are you sure it should be "has" and not "had"? –♠Vami_IV†♠ 04:40, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

  Y Typo - s and d being next to each other on the keyboard - "had" is not required though, so deleted. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 05:05, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

• COMZ estimated that this require would require

  Y Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:34, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Outcome

• neither the Ruhr nor the Saar was reached in 1944 were reached

  The singular form nof the verb is correct here. Two singular subjects connected by or, either/or, or neither/nor require a singular verb.. [1]

• This was exacerbated by senior commanders [...] This was exacerbated by the poor supply discipline The latter of these two sentences immediately follows the former.

  Y joined the two with a conjunction. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:50, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

GA progress

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.