Talk:American logistics in the Northern France campaign/GA1

GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Hog Farm (talk · contribs) 03:18, 13 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

I'll take this review on. It may take me a few days to work through it, though. Hog Farm Bacon 03:18, 13 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

Background
  • There's several instances of "would be". In various GA/ACR article's I've sent through the reviewing process, multiple editors have strongly objected to most instances of the would be phrasing as excessively passive voice
     Y Except that "would be" is not the passive voice; it's the past future tense. Removed a couple of instances though. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:06, 14 August 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • "The Overlord plan called for the capture of Cherbourg by D plus 8" - Probably best to have a brief gloss stating what D plus 8 means. I understand this, but readers without a good military history background may not.
     Y Added a parenthetical explanation. In some other articles I have eschewed the use of this idiom, but the problem here is that D-Day moved. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:06, 14 August 2020 (UTC)Reply
Breakout and pursuit
  • " as a deception formation" - Is there a link for this? I understand what this indicates, but it's not a particularly common phrase.
     Y Added a bit, with a link to Operation Fortitude. It doesn't explain "deception" either though... Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:06, 14 August 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • " There were significant differences in the way Patton, a cavalryman, and Bradley and the VIII Corps commander, Major General Troy H. Middleton, who were both infantrymen" - I'd recommend linking to cavalry and infantry at the respective points, which would help underscore the difference for the uninformed.
     Y Added links. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:06, 14 August 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • "and SHAEF had" - This is the first appearance of SHAEF. What does the acronym stand for?
     Y An artifact of splitting the original article in tow. I was afraid of this. Added an explanation. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:06, 14 August 2020 (UTC)Reply
POL
  • "The MT80 supply was adequate for the first month of Operation Cobra" - First mention of MT80, link or gloss what it is
     Y Another artefact. Added an explanation. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:06, 14 August 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • "with the First Army burning 501,000 US gallons (1,900,000 l) per day (282,000 US gallons (1,070,000 l) on 24 August alone)" - This is an odd clause. You state that it was using 501,000 gallons of fuel per day, indicating an average, but then call out a number barely half of that as if it is a significant usage. I think there's a minor phrasing error here somewhere.
     Y Typo. Should have 782,000 gallons (2,125 tons). Aside: the Germans measured their fuel in cubic metres. Fortunately, the mental conversion to kilolitres is pretty easy. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:06, 14 August 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • Link C-ration
     Y Linked. Another artefact. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:06, 14 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

And that's through the end of the POL section. More to come, but I've only found minor prose comments so far. Looking like a great article. Hog Farm Bacon 04:46, 14 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

Due to the split, it has already passed GA and A class once; problems arise from the split itself. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:06, 14 August 2020 (UTC)Reply
Railways
Motor transport

Through the motor transport section. More to come later. Hog Farm Bacon 20:39, 14 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

Ports
Duplinks
Captions
Final note

That's it I believe. Heck of an article. Hog Farm Bacon 23:34, 14 August 2020 (UTC)Reply