Talk:Battle of Hannut/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:28, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I haven't much experience with military articles but we'll see how this goes. I will make straightforward changes as I go - please revert any where I inadvertently change the meaning - and note queries below. Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:28, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

• Erm...refs go at the end of a sentence - why is there one right after the first three words?

• Battle of Hannut[7] was a World War II battle fought during the Battle of Belgium - three "Battles" in a row. Is this one a little battle? Is there another name for a little battle? Encounter?

• The Allied supreme commander General Maurice Gamelin committed his First Army Group, under General Gaston Billotte, and its strongest Army, the French 1st Army with the fully mechanised Corps de Cavalerie (Cavalry Corps), commanded by General René-Jacques-Adolphe Prioux, to advance into Belgium to support the large but more lightly equipped Belgian Army. - this is a really long sentence. Can it be broken up?

• Gamelin expected the German attack to break the Belgian defences at the Albert Canal line rapidly—the Belgians had in any case indicated they would after four days withdraw to the planned allied front in central Belgium, the "Dyle Line" between Antwerp and Namur—and sought to quickly establish an entrenched front line centred on Gembloux, just north of Namur, to check what Gamelin foresaw as the main enemy effort (Schwerpunkt) of the campaign: an attempt to break through the "Gembloux Gap" between the rivers Dyle and Meuse with a concentration of armoured forces. - ditto. Not too bad but I wouldn't know where to break it. There are two "Gamelin" s in it too.

• What's a manoeuvre battle?

I'd say, particularly from the context, "an intentional meeting engagement," the latter term not sounding quite right as an intended option? I think it's conventional enough military history terminology, but then when I read the question I second guessed myself. I'm not the author there.

I did make some minor changes as 99.192.48.185 because I didn't have a login, dunno how to "consolidate" them. Jason Townsend (talk) 15:40, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

• Point from me; Second World War, not World War II. The Americans weren't involved, so we use Commonwealth English. Ironholds (talk) 18:51, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Comment

As the creator of the article and (I think) the possessor of the reference material, this page is not fit for GA yet. It is missing detail and it will be a while before it should be reviewed. Can I request that this GA review be stopped/suspended until I have had time to complete it? Dapi89 (talk) 17:37, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Sure. I can leave it for a bit. Just drop me line when you're done and we can continue :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:20, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Dapi to be honest. I don't think that it should be an outright fail buy we do need a bit more time. After all, Dapi has made way more edits to this article than me and as a result, he should have the final say as to if I should nominate it or wait.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 21:49, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

THat's fine - I can leave this for a couple of weeks no problems - many linger at GA review stage for longer than that. Just ping me when ready. Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:51, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Comment: This may take some time (a few months), so I think a complete delist is required. Dapi89 (talk) 12:20, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I'll not-promote it on comprehensiveness then. Ping me when you list it again. Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:51, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Fog of war

"Each DLM thus had an organic strength of 240 tanks and 44 Panhards, for a total of 176 SOMUA S35s" Does that mean the total per DLM was 176 S35s, or the total for all 3 DLMs? TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 10:18, 2 January 2011 (UTC)