Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/18th Infantry Division (United Kingdom)/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 archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 09:19, 4 April 2018 [1].

18th Infantry Division (United Kingdom) edit

Nominator(s): EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 22:09, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The 18th Infantry Division was a British army formation that is best known, if not largely forgotten, for fighting in the Battle of Singapore. Prior to that infamous battle, it had been raised and formed in 1939 and spent the next few years being deployed around various parts of the UK. Due to mounting political needs for additional British fighting troops in North Africa, the division was deployed in a roundabout way to the Middle East. However, with the Japanese entry into the war, it was diverted to Malaya and Singapore. One brigade fought in Malaya, and the entire division (although mishandled and committed piecemeal) fought in the disastrous defense of Singapore and joined in the general surrender. Due to the conditions of Japanese camps, over 1/3 of the division's men never returned nor was the division reformed after the surrender. The article has been given the once over by the Guild of Copyeditors, and has passed both its GA and A-Class reviews.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 22:09, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • File:18_inf_div_-vector.svg should include a date for the original design
    Was this in regards to the PD-UKGov tag that was in use? If so, I have updated in favor of PD-Shape. Other than that, I do not believe any work includes a date the design was actually conjured up.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 23:42, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Japanese_troops_final_stages_to_conquest_Singapore,_Johore_Bahru_(AWM_127900).JPG is missing info on first publication. Same with File:British_troops_surrender_in_Singapore.png. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:11, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    In regards to these two, the AWM (link and link states the copyright has expired on both works. It does not, however, provide information regarding when it was first published. So, how do we proceed from here?EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 23:42, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Would this tag be accurate? That would avoid the issue entirely. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:41, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sources review edit

A few minor points:

  • Ref 21: Pedantically, IWM is plural ("Museums" not "Museum"). Also you should use "publisher=" rather than "website=", which will de-italicise IWM
    Quite! Also, amended per your comment.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 23:49, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 48: The hyphen in the p. range needs to be a ndash
    AmendedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 23:49, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd be inclined to differentiate in the short citations between the two "Playfair et al 2004" sources.
    Would a simple "a" and "b" tacked on the end of the year suffice?EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 23:49, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Otherwise, the sources are in good order and of the appropriate quality and reliability. Brianboulton (talk) 15:30, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ditto. All citations & references formatted well. Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 05:32, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by CPA-5 Here am i again the page look good let see i have some comments.

  • See an American English organization or is it a name of an organisation and if it is a name of an organisation then please link it then.
    I rechecked the Gazette, and they use the "z". I have been unable to locate an article about this position, so have red-linked it per the above.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 23:26, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Link the units 135th Field Regiment, 287th Field Company and Japanese I/5th Battalion.
    British artillery and engineer units generally do not have articles, and in particular these two. Likewise, no article exists for the Japanese battalion. In all cases, however, the relevant parent organization is linked to soo after.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 23:26, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Switch this units.

Australian 22nd Brigade --> 22nd Australian Brigade

Japanese I/5th Battalion --> I/5th Japanese Battalion

Australian 2/29th Battalion --> 2/29th Australian Battalion

Japanese 5th Infantry Division --> 5th Japanese Infantry Division

Australian 2/30th Battalion --> 2/30th Australian Battalion

  • I would feel more comfortable if additional editors could chime in on this one. My personal preference, based I guess off a British POV, would to be use the style you have suggested. The current style is one that seems to more favored on the wiki, it would seem.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 23:26, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • The official names should be used, but I don't have a strong preference if both versions were used officially.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:54, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Link this please.

Middle East in this line "on 10 November destined for the Middle East"

  • I have added the link to the first mention, a few sentences before this point.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 23:26, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nova Scotia in this line "continued to Nova Scotia"

Muar–Yong Peng road in this line "troops on the Muar–Yong Peng road back under the command of Westforce"

  • Linked to Muar, and added a link to Yong Peng at first mention.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 23:26, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Canada in this line. "American ships and left Canada bound"

United Kingdom in this line. "which led the United Kingdom to secure"

  • This has already been linked to, in the first line of the background section.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 23:26, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please change this two.

south-west --> southwest

11 weeks at sea --> eleven weeks at sea

  • Who's Wavell? I mean i don't see his first name and rank or job.

This line is the first time i see the name in the page.

"On 20 January, Wavell visited Singapore to discuss the defence of the island"

And for the rest i don't see his first name and rank or job if it is there please tell me where and if he isn't linked then link him/she then.

  • Introduced in full, in the Transfer to Middle East section.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 23:26, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • who were the original uploaders of this two images? File:Japanese_troops_final_stages_to_conquest_Singapore,_Johore_Bahru_(AWM_127900).JPG and File:British_troops_surrender_in_Singapore.png
    User: Muffin Wizard uploaded the first, and I uploaded the latter. If you are referring to the "unknown" author, that is based off the information available at the Australian War Memorial.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 23:26, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Put please the category Military units and formations disestablished in 1942 in the page.
    AddedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 23:26, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Which government in this line?

"the British Government sought"

Which government the Chamberlain war ministry or the Churchill war ministry?

  • I, personally, do not feel that this needs to be clarified upon.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 23:26, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support by CPA-5 So i hope this will help you i did reviewed the A-class before and i hope this page will get a FA-class goodluck further on. CPA-5 (talk) 18:09, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Once more, thank you for your time and review. I have attempted to address several of your comments, and have left comments of my own for a few others.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 23:26, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Sturmvogel_66 edit

  • Second line divisions/unit needs a hyphen between the first two words.
  • Priority for new equipment was given to a handful of formations that would launch the riposte to any German landings.[33] Each infantry division was to have seventy-two 25-pounder field guns. On 31 May 1940, the 18th Division was only equipped with four First World War vintage 18-pounder field guns and eight 4.5-inch howitzers. The division had no anti-tank guns against a nominal establishment of 48, and only 47 instead of 307 Boys anti-tank rifles. This reads awkwardly because there are really two separate issues here, as I see it. The first is that the division was underequipped and the second is that issues of new equipment would go to units other than the 18th. So I'd delete the first sentence or rework it to state that the division was low on the priority list to get new equipment. I know that some ex-TA units had their modern equipment transferred to prewar units at various times. Did this happen to the 18th? And is there any info available as to when the division was filled out with all of its equipment?
  • xt|13 January 1941 albeit without needs a comma after the date.
  • In the 53rd Brigade section, you mention a causeway. The one to Singapore?
  • Any chance of a map showing these battles in Malaya?
  • More later.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:16, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Coord note edit

I'm afraid that despite being open two months and listed among the FACs urgently needing commentary, this review seems to have petered out so I'll be archiving it shortly. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:18, 4 April 2018 (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/18th_Infantry_Division_(United_Kingdom)/archive1&oldid=834303250"