Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/American logistics in the Western Allied invasion of Germany/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by FrB.TG via FACBot (talk) 16 October 2023 [1].

American logistics in the Western Allied invasion of Germany

edit
Nominator(s): Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:15, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is the final article in the series about logistics in the campaigns in north west Europe in 1944-1945. This one covers the American logistics in the final advance into Germany in 1945. It covers a longer period of time and a larger body of troops than previous articles. In writing the article, I was able to take into account reviewer comments on previous articles in the series from the time of article creation. The article follows operations closely, and incorporates recent scholarship. It uses a broad range of sources. Interest in World War II is waning as it recedes further into history, and the Central Europe campaign has never attracted its fair share of attention. The article has nice maps and some striking images. From a logistical point of view, the US Army had incorporated the lessons of the earlier campaigns and operated with a heightened degree of efficiency. In contrast to the campaigns of 1944, logistical issues had little impact on operations, partly because the armies operated with a greater awareness of them. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:15, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image review
  • No licensing issues found.
  • Minor sandwiching between the first two images in the "Central Europe campaign#Railways" and "Central Europe campaign#Motor transport" sections

(t · c) buidhe 01:21, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Other comments by Buidhe
  • At over 12,000 words the article is really a behemoth and could easily be considered to fail the length criterion because of the large amount of detail, which might belong better in sub-articles. I am not really seeing a convenient split point, so I understand that reducing the word count would not be straightforward or easy.
  • There are some sections that seem too long for good readability. I would consider splitting "Rhineland", and "Central Europe campaign#Motor transport"

(t · c) buidhe 01:21, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I split Central Europe campaign#Motor transport and reduced the size of Rhineland by moving a paragraph. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 07:17, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments by JennyOz

edit

Placeholder for now JennyOz (talk) 03:26, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hawkeye, logistics is rather fascinating! Who knew?...

I love the opening image. "Don't go anywhere Adolf, we're coming for you."

lede

Background

Organization

  • forces in Southern France had - no cap on southern? (Southern France)
    One of the more opaque parts of the MOS. "Doubts frequently arise when referring to regions, such as eastern Spain and Southern California. If one is consistently capitalized in reliable sources (as with North Korea, Southern California or Western Europe), then the direction word in it is capitalized. Otherwise it is not, as with eastern Spain or southwest Poland. If you are not sure whether a region has attained proper-name status, assume it has not." (MOS:CAPS) It appears that the capitalised form used to be the most common, but no more. De-capped. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:37, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The base sections were dived into districts. - divided
    Ooops. Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:37, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Similarly, when the it in turn was absorbed - remove the
    Removed. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:37, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Situation in January 1945

Equipment loss and replacement

Transportation

  • Shipping mail on these trains - how so? Was mail guarded?
    They were, but also by reducing travel times and times. Added a bit. Fun fact: the central post office was manned by the 6888th Central Postal Battalion, which was entirely composed of Black women. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:37, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Balancing the troop basis

Replacing casualties

Planning and preparations for the Rhine crossing

Rhineland

First Army

Ninth Army

Third Army

Seventh Army

Central Europe campaign

Railways

Motor transport

Pipelines

Prisoners of war

Outcome

Footnotes

References

Table American casualties in the ETO

Images

Footnotes

  • c. Ruppenthal also served in the campaign, but as the Third Army historical officer. - why "but"? Aren't military historians important people?
    Contrasted with MacDonald, who served in the front line as a company commander, and was awarded the silver star. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:37, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Misc consistency

That's it for me for now. JennyOz (talk) 08:04, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this. I think you caught a couple no one else could find. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:37, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again. I made a few minor tweaks to article, hope okay. I've now added a few comments above. JennyOz (talk) 08:09, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Jenny, I was wondering if you felt in a position to either support or oppose this nomination? Obviously, neither is obligatory. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:47, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Hawkeye and Gog, just made a few more minor tweaks, pls check. Yes!, I am happy to add my s'port. JennyOz (talk) 03:17, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MyCatIsAChonk

edit

I added a number of commas just to divide dates and clarify any confusion, hope you don't mind- if you oppose any, go right ahead and remove them.

Hawkeye7: Goodness, this article has such a thorough and massive prose section, but I have very few comments; extremely good job on writing this, it's very impressive! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 13:27, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your review! And for correcting a few US English spellings. Greatly appreciated. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:18, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 01:18, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Gog the Mlld

edit
Thanks. I am going to be away for a few days and probably won't get started until I get back. If I haven't set to by the end of Monday feel free to give me another nudge. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:58, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hawkeye7 I'm sorry also not to have been able to respond yet; please poke my talk page again after Gog is done? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:03, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And that's it from me. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:32, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your review! Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:58, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

edit

Sources appear reliable and (apart from some very minor things I tweaked) suitably formatted. N.B. No spotchecks carried out. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 17:58, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/American_logistics_in_the_Western_Allied_invasion_of_Germany/archive1&oldid=1180492885"