Talk:Battle of Douvres Radar Station

The New Sections (3+1) February 2018.

As you may note I added Three Sections last week, thinking their facts are valuable, adding to the article ... and I placed them at the End of The Article. Sitting at the end of the article, they could be attractive to someone 'with a real interest' in the subject, not taking away from the Story of the Battle: The Assault and 41 RM Cdo.

A little detailed ... I was going to clean them a little, confirming a couple of facts, needing a second reference (which I have) and adding some clarity to a few details. And modifying the format in two sections ... to reduce the indents. This week I added a fourth Section: D+1 ... as a Bridge/ Lead-in to the Assault Section. And I added a 'last' paragraph in Background to tie the 3+1 New Sections together.

Would it be possible to consider 'REreformatting' and putting the x3 Sections: The Objective / The Radars (thanks for the image) / The Defenders at the end of the Article? I would then 'clean' them up ... and you could decide what to do, keep it as it might be set-out or have a very big 'Background'?

I am not 'experienced' enough to comment on Sections with (Big) Subsections, Thanks for the Consideration. KWS PEI 17.Feb.2018 — Preceding unsigned comment added by KWS PEI (talk • contribs) 22:21, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

The Notes Section March 2018

As you will note the change I requested above was made and I have begun to edit the Three Notes 'now' at the bottom of the Article. I have cleaned somewhat The Objective, looking for a couple more links, and have additional detail to add to The Radars and The Defenders.

I will try an automatic signature this time? KWS PEI 00:37, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

'Black Watch, 5th Battalion, Royal Regiment of Scotland'

With respect, unless this refers to a Canadian unit of which I am unaware, The Royal Regiment of Scotland only came into being in 2006.

I assume the unit in question was the 5th Battalion, The Black Watch, a British territorial unit that formed part of the 51st Highland Division.

JF42 (talk) 09:41, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

"Vollfestungsmäßig Groß Suchstellung"

The term barely makes any sense, it's certainly not standard German. Is the term overwhelmingly used in English-language literature? In this case it wouldn't be a German term at all, and everything goes.

Otherwise it should be fixed. Unfortunately, as I said it barely makes any sense, so there is no obvious fix. Maybe "vollfestungsmäßige große Suchstellung", but even that would be an awkward term. --84.132.148.245 (talk) 14:26, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Missing reference

@GraemeLeggett: Your edit of this article here added a reference — {{Sfn|Saunders|2012|p=185}} — that does not point to a citation. Can this error be fixed? —GoldRingChip 21:38, 11 November 2024 (UTC)