Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/American transportation in the Siegfried Line campaign

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.

---

Article promoted by Hog Farm (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 04:20, 30 November 2021 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list

American transportation in the Siegfried Line campaign

Instructions for nominators and reviewers

Nominator(s): Hawkeye7 (talk)

American transportation in the Siegfried Line campaign (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

• Featured article candidates/American transportation in the Siegfried Line campaign/archive1
• Featured article candidates/American transportation in the Siegfried Line campaign/archive2

This article takes up where American logistics in the Northern France campaign leaves off, covering the period from September 1944 to January 1945. The volume of material was considerable, so I split the article into two parts; one about transportation, and one about supply. In this phase, the American armies remained largely static through September and October for lack of supplies, particularly ammunition. Initially this was because the rapid advance across France and Belgium created lengthy supply lines; the rehabilitation of railways could not keep pace, and the use of motor transport was a stopgap that caused longer term problems. Then, as the weather deteriorated, the beaches became unusable, and the lack of port capacity became a problem because the ports in Brittany that had been intended to supply the American forces had not been captured. Shipping piled up offshore, unable to discharge, and the resulting shortage of ships threatened the entire Allied war effort. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:29, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Comments/Source review from AustralianRupert
Support: G'day, Hawkeye, this is just a quick run through at this stage -- I will try to take a better look sometime in the next few days. Here are a few minor points: AustralianRupert (talk) 14:00, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

• "outmanoeuvered" --> "outmaneuvered"
• "short term" --> "short-term"?
• "An accumulations of idle shipping" --> "An accumulation of idle shipping"
• "deep water berths" --> "deep-water berths"?
• "cannibalising" --> "cannibalizing"
• "formalised" --> "formalized"
• "dischaged" --> "discharged"
• "It rehabilitation was" --> "Its rehabilitation was"
• "USAPRS Thomas F. Farrell Jr., a Baltic coaster converted to an engineer port repair ship" --> italics for the ship's name?
• "Le Havre Harbor" --> "Le Havre harbor"?
• line of communications is overlinked
• "Channel, Army stevedores unload" --> "Channel, US Army stevedores unload"?
• "Ardennes Offensive" --> lower case for consistency
• "Cherbourg Harbor" v. "Cherbourg harbor" (consistency)
• spot checked citations 56, 68 and 84 -- all support the text they are listed against (no action required)
• references appear to be reliable based on authors or publishers (no action required)
• all information appears referenced (no action required)
  • Y All corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:42, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Continuing the review below: AustralianRupert (talk) 13:15, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "On 24 August, Eisenhower decided to continue the pursuit of the retreating" --> as with the supply article, suggest clarifying the other option here

  Y Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "twelve divisions could": link division

  Y Linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "removing mines": link mine

  Y Linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• " 625,000 deadweight tons (635,000 deadweight tonnes) of coasters" --> while I understand that each ship's weight will vary, I think it is a little difficult for the average reader to conceptualise what 625,000 deadwieght tons of ship equates to. Is it possible to clarify how many actual ships this equated to?

  Regrettably not. I consulted several sources without success. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

  No worries. Thanks for checking. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 12:52, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

• "and the by time the Battle for Brest ended" -- typo

  Y Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "cuts to UK Import Program" --> "cuts to the UK Import Program"?

  Y Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "several MTVs and store ship were" --> "several MTVs and store ships were"?

  Y Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "Over 200 ships in European waters awaiting discharge" --> "Over 200 ships were in European waters awaiting discharge"?

  Y Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "The shipping crisis in ETO escalated" --> "The shipping crisis in the ETO escalated"?

  Y Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "175 in January and February" --> perhaps add the year here

  Y Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "using Army lighters" -- link lighter

  Y Linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "The first four Liberty ships entered": move the link to the first mention of Liberty ships

  Y Linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "The Darse Transatlantique was not cleared of mines until 21 August, but the access channel was not cleared until 18 September" --> "The Darse Transatlantique had been cleared of mines by 21 August, but the access channel was not cleared until 18 September"?

  Y Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "Advance warning ship of arrivals" --> "Advance warning of ship arrivals"

  Y Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "and improvisations such as propeller shaft strut bearings from applewood and replacement rudders from scrap metal. [71]" --> and improvisations such as constructing propeller shaft strut bearings from applewood and replacement rudders from scrap metal. [71]" (also, suggest removing the space between the full stop and the citation)

  Y Reworded and removed the space. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "Nonetheless, the port exceeded their expectations" --> who is "their" here?

  Y Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "The German had demolished the cargo" --> "The Germans had demolished the cargo"

  Y Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• link platoon

  Y Linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "with a Landing ship, infantry (LSI) on" --> earlier you use "Landing Ship, Tank" -- suggest consistency in capitalisation (I'd tend towards Landing Ship, Infantry but potentially the house style is to decaps - although that looks very wrong to me)

  Y It looks wrong to me too, and the articles are titled Landing ship, infantry and Landing Ship, Infantry. Changed to match the MOS. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "It was situated on Scheldt River some" --> "It was situated on the Scheldt River some"

  Y Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "with its port facilities large intact thanks to the" --> "with its port facilities largely intact thanks to the"

  Y Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "to hammer out the details": possibly a little informal

  Y Deleted. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "The Americans forces would" --> "The American forces would" or "The Americans would"

  Y Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "from the American freighter Blenheim" --> italics for the ship name

  Y Italicised. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "Before the war, Antwerp had been a transit port, and it did not possess large amounts of covered storage space" --> some of this has been said earlier, suggest: "Antwerp did not possess large amounts of covered storage space..."

  I think that was in the lead. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

  Quite right, sorry, not sure what I was drthinking there. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 12:52, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

• "which had previous been engaged" --> "which had previously been engaged"

  Y Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "dispatched 8,209 long tons (8,341 t)in 1,542 trucks" --> typo (space required before "in")

  Y Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "most famous of express highway delivery route" --> "most famous express highway delivery route"

  Y Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "the Little Red ball Express" --> "the Little Red Ball Express"?

  Y Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "still more trucks available at the NYPE" --> has NYPE been introduced formally yet?

  Y Weird. I could have sworn that it was mentioned earlier. Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "Tires were the most critical" --> move the link for tires to the first use of the term

  Y Linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "for First Army" and "for Third Army": definite article?

  Y Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "These were augmented by captured rolling stock. [110]" --> remove the space between the full stop and the citation

  Y Deleted. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "in for bomb bay tanks" --> "in bomb bay tanks"

  Y Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "were withdrawn at the end of September": do we know why? One assumes there was an operational need -- could this be clarified, potentially?

  Y Clarified. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "what was required with winter clothing and equipment" --> "what was required was winter clothing and equipment"

  Y Re-worded. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• "A second attempt the following day was scrubbed" --> probably best to just say cancelled as the average reader might not know what scrubbed means in this context

  Y Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

All points addressed. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

• Thanks, added my support above -- great work as always. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 12:52, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Support from Vami

• Both Ruppenthal 1959 have a "extra text in |volume=" error.

  Wonder where that comes from? I'm not getting it. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:40, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

  Bizarre. I'll just remove the extra text, then (turns out it was Ruppenthal 1953 and Ruppenthal 1959). –♠Vami_IV†♠ 03:01, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

• [...] the World War II campaign in northwest Europe that ran from the end of the pursuit of the German armies from Normandy in mid-September 1944 until December 1944, [...] This would be a good place to link the Allied advance from Paris to the Rhine

  Y Um, okay. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:40, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

• Additional port capacity was obtained through the development of the ports of Rouen and Le Havre, and in November, Antwerp was opened. Recommend rough dates for Rouen and Le Havre as with Antwerp; also recommend "and the opening of Antwerp in November".

  Y Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:40, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Background & Shipping

• In the first seven weeks after the Allied invasion of Normandy [...] Would a link to Operation Overlord here be excessive?

  Y Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:40, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

  @Hawkeye7: I did not noticed until coming back to mark off my comments that I originally ended this suggestion with a period, rather than a question mark as I intended. I'm sorry if I came off as rude there. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 03:01, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

• [...] Lieutenant General Omar N. Bradley [...] Brigadier General John M. Franklin Link rank?

  Y Linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:40, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

• When the Germans were outmaneuvered and then driven into a chaotic retreat, [...] Can you add a when and where here?

  Operation Cobra is already mentioned above. Moved sentence up. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:40, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

• [...] fell during September because it had to handle [...] Recommend "the port" in place of "it".

  Y Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:40, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

• Not until December, with the opening of the port of Antwerp [...] Link Port of Antwerp?

  Y Linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:40, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

• Conway enlisted Harry Hopkins [...] Introduce Hopkins.

  Y Introduced. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:40, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Ports

• [...] the minor ports in Normandy and Brittany.[21] The minor ports in Normandy and Brittany [...] Recommend replacement of second half with "These".

  Y Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:40, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

• Granville, Cancale, Saint-Brieuc, and Morlaix should be linked.

  Y Linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:40, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

• "train ferries" and "stevedores" too.

  Linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:40, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

• [...] whose name was pronounced (and sometimes spelt) "ducks". I am not sure how pertinent this is the topic at hand.

  It was used for the DYK hook. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:40, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

  Ah. Disregard, then. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 03:01, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

• The Darse Transatlantique was cleared of mines until 21 August, [...] What happened on 21 August?

  Y Added "not". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:40, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

• This was slower and more manpower intensive than quayside unloading due to multiple handling. Is there a missing word here?

  Looks okay to me. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:40, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

  I've no idea what "multiple handling" is, so I assumed you meant "multiple handing issues". –♠Vami_IV†♠ 03:01, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

• By then it was evident that while the target of discharging 20,000 long tons (20,000 t) might be achievable, port discharge was only half the battle; [...] Ditto.

  Looks okay to me. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:40, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

• [...] but on departure on 25 September it navigated the inner and outer harbors and cleared the block ships, but then struck a mine and sank. Two buts.

  Y Re-worded. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:40, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

• At this point nine berths were available [...] Recommend past-tense.

  "were" is the past tense. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:40, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

  yeah re-reviewing this now i have no idea what i was thinking here. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 03:01, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

• [...] and 51,111 passed through [...] Recommend addition of "soldiers" or "personnel" after the big number there.

  Y Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:40, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

• Some of the burning cars contained bags mail from home, [...] Huh?

  Y Added missing word. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:40, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

• By 4 January there were nearly 3,500 railroad cars were lying fully loaded but idle at the port; thousands more were at the Advance Section (ADSEC) depots around Liege, where they were not unloaded. Huh?

  Y Re-worded. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:40, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Railways

• [...] fighting had passed through and the network restored. Missing "was"?

  Y Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:40, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

• [...] but a major factor was a decision to ship bulk supplies directly from the ports to the ADSEC and army depots in to reduce shipping congestion. Huh?

  Y Deleted "in". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:40, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

• The forward railheads at the forward railheads [...] Huh?

  Y Deleted repeated words. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:40, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Reading completed. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 02:10, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Supporting. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 03:01, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Support Comments from Iazyges

• Will start soon. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 03:45, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Lede

• but before the war it had been a transit port, and it did not possess large amounts of covered storage space. These seem to be related but not outright said; that it didn't posses large covered storage space because it was a transit port, I would simply say but before the war it had been a transit port, and therefore did not possess large amounts of covered storage space. I think this is covered by sources, especially for it had been of p. 111, but I understand if you view this as straying too far from the sources.

  Y Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:40, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Background

(First three are stolen from my previous review.

• Operation Cobra, which commenced on 25 July, effected a turnaround in the operational situation suggest When the American Operation Cobra, launched on 25 July 1944 as in the British article.

  Y Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:40, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

• Another army, the Ninth Army, suggest removing Another army

  Y Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:40, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

• Railways could not be repaired and pipelines constructed quickly enough suggest Railways could not be repaired and pipelines could not be constructed quickly enough

  Y Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:40, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

• but there was a shortage of suitable vehicles owing to political interference this could probably use a spot of elaboration. Perhaps but there was a shortage of suitable vehicles owing to political interference from [x] because of [y],

  Y Added a bit more. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:40, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Shipping

• The delay in capturing and opening Cherbourg meant that Cherbourg, the minor ports and the beaches would have to handle far more daily tonnage than originally planned. I think Cherbourg is accidentally used twice, so I've changed it to The delay in capturing and opening Cherbourg meant the minor ports and the beaches would have to handle far more daily tonnage than originally planned; please revert that if I'm misreading it.

  Y Already corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:40, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

• The Utah and Omaha beaches were closed for good on 13 and 19 November respectively. suggest changing for good to permanently

  Y Prefer the original. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:40, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Ports

• Granville had been subject to systematic demolition, with quays cratered, cranes tipped into the water, and the harbor blocked with sunken craft. should specify who did this if possible, I'm assuming not the Americans, probably the Germans? Perhaps Granville had been subject to systematic demolition by [German occupiers/retreating German forces], with quays cratered, cranes tipped into the water, and the harbor blocked with sunken craft.
• workers elsewhere demanded the same the hallmark of any true MilHist article (no suggestion).
• @Hawkeye7: That is all my suggestions, apologies for taking so long. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 20:03, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

CommentsSupport from PM

Great to see all these loggie articles coming through, Hawkeye. A few comments from me:

Lead

• a brief mention of air and inland waterways would be a useful inclusion

  Added a mention. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Background

• suggest "on D-Day – 6 June – determined"

  Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• Operation Overlord is duplinked in successive sentences, Granville, Saint-Malo and Antwerp are also duplinked

  Unlinked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• suggest "the US 12th Army Group", as you've just talked about Allied forces more generally

  Not sure what this means. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• suggest "but also Lieutenant General John C. H. Lee's US Communications Zone (COMZ)"

  Not sure what this means. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• suggest "Bradley had exercised control over the COMZ" and "between the armies and the COMZ"*suggest "COMZ headquarters also functioned as the headquarters of the European Theater of Operations, United States Army (ETOUSA)"

  Um,, okay. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• suggest "to take advantage of the disorganized German retreat"

  Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• suggest "for under the Operation Overlord plan, the ports of Lorient and Quiberon Bay in Brittany"

  Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• the link to "developed" is a bit eastereggy, could you widen it?

  Scrambled. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• Just a question about the reliance on Dick for the assessment of the issues with waste, disorder etc. It is not a question about Dick's reliability, but more about whether this a widely held view? Could it be strengthened with citations from another authoritative source?

  Sure. I was trying to use more recent sources. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Shipping

• suggest "the Omaha and Utah landing beaches"

  Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• suggest adding a sentence fragment explaining what coasters were. Perhaps introducing them as coastal trading vessels?

  Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• suggest "It was planned that after the first six weeks, the allocation to Overlord would be reduced to 250,000 deadweight tons (250,000 deadweight tonnes)."

  Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• deadlining is an unusual term, some explanation might be useful

  Re-worded. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• suggest "From September onwards, it was planned that an increasing volume of supplies would come directly from the United States"

  Re-worded. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• "By the end of September, 219 ships would require discharge on the continent, which was 44 more than the theater said it required" doesn't make sense to me. If the theater did need them, why were they coming?

  Expanded on this. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• "equinoctal gales" is an unusual term (and I understand a popular misconception) that could do with a bit of explanation. Also, isn't it "equinoctial gales", or is this the American spelling?

  Typo. But in view of this, changed to "autumn gales". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• link classes of supply

  Linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• what was the UK Import Program?

  A subject that deserves its own article. Added a breif explanation. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• the meaning of "considered the ETO's estimate that 260 would be unloaded in October to be "fantastic"" would probably be clearer by rewriting without using the quote

  Reworded. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• "combat loader" is obscure. Why not go with Amphibious cargo ship?

  Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• suggest "As ships failed to return on time, supplies began piling up at the ports, depots and railway sidings in the US" if this is what is meant?

  Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• is "Somervell proposed eliminating the American contribution UK Import Program" missing a word or two?

  Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• suggest linking Liege at first mention in the body

  Linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Down to Ports. More to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:01, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Ports

• I believe the full names are 16th Major Port and 5th Major Port. This applies to later mentions too. You could add that they were part of the Transportation Corps (and link)

  Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• say where Granville is (ie Normandy)

  Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• suggest "The task of rehabilitating the Brittany ports of Cancale, Saint-Brieuc and Saint-Malo"

  Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• link Morlaix and say it was also in Brittany

  Linked and said it is in Brittany. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• what were the "Seine ports"?

  Le Havre and Rouen. For some reason there is no article. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• suggest "and Saint-Brieuc, and the Normandy ports of Barfleur, Saint-Vaast-la-Hougue, Carentan, Grandcamp and Isigny"

  Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• "The minor ports of Brittany" doesn't flow, as you have just described the closure of minor ports in both Brittany and Normandy

  Moved the sentence. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• the use of the French names for features of Cherbourg harbor without explanation isn't optimal. Perhaps a brief explanation after each when first mentioned? ie the Jetée du Homet (a one-kilometer-long stone pier at the entrance to the inner harbor)

  A map is provided. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• "just 38.4" percent?

  Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• "stake boats" is jargony, needs explanation

  Changed to "mooring boats" Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• isn't "Signal Corps Radio" actually a misnomer? Perhaps just "a small army radio"

  No, it's correct. The article is linked. And not all were small. Unfortunately, the source doesn't say which SCR it was. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• "With the opening of ports further north"? Wouldn't east be more useful to the reader?

  Not sure. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• "Two artificial piers that were made from Phoenix breakwaters salvaged from the Mulberry harbour project"?

  Deleted stray word. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• how was the crossover of the main supply route from Le Havre with the British MSR managed?

  I'm not sure it was. The fear was traffic gridlocks, but this did not eventuate. The British controlled the north-south roads and the Americans the east-west ones. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Down to Rouen. More to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:05, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

I'll finish this up over the weekend, bit pressed for time today and tomorrow. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:58, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

• suggest "51,111 of themtroops"

  Y That creates a repetition of "troops". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:12, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

• suggest "which connected to the Meuse River that ran through Liege" to avoid the "which... which" repetition

  Y Re-worded. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:12, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

• suggest changing the piping to "Operations to clear the Schelt"

  Y Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:12, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

• who used Bassin Albert?

  Y Clarified. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:12, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

• suggest "Ghent had not been badly damaged"

  Y Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:12, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

• suggest "and the British agreed to ship 150 locomotives in December"

  Y Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:12, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

• suggest "Between 23 and 27 December, 850"

  Y Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:12, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

• perhaps explain what a sea mule tug is? Effectively a motorised barge made of pontoons

  Y Added a bit, with a reference. [1]

That's me done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:10, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Nice work, Hawkeye! Supporting. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:01, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Image review - pass

• Apologies for taking so long, will take up the image review as well. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 21:07, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
• File:Unloading of the 500,000th long ton at Le Havre.tif unable to find the first name of "Klosterman", but since its a direct quote from the Gov source, not much can be done about that.

  Captain Paul C. Klosterman, a US Army Signal Corps Photographer. Added to the image info. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:14, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

• File:Barges on the Albert Canal.jpg Can't access the book itself but the image doesn't exist anywhere else I can find, so no issues.

  Have found access to book and added link on Commons. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 21:20, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

• File:Bastogne resupply1944 sm.jpg Can't track down Gov source that labels this as army produced, but website source makes the claim and certain US army elements have subsequently used the image and confirmed it as authentic, and I can't imagine a lot of non-military people were hanging around Bastogne at the time. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 21:16, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

  At the bottom right of the image there is the US Army Signal Corps image number: 415376. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:14, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

  Well, I feel stupid... Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 15:11, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

• No issues, pass. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 21:20, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

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.