Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/2/15th Battalion (Australia)

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 Hawkeye7 (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 00:06, 22 July 2016 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list[reply]

2/15th Battalion (Australia) edit

Nominator(s): AustralianRupert (talk)

A Queensland-raised infantry battalion of the Second Australian Imperial Force, the 2/15th Battalion was part of the 9th Division who held Tobruk during its siege in 1941 and then later took part in the fighting around El Alamein in 1942. Returning to Australia in 1943, the battalion later fought against the Japanese in New Guinea around Lae, on the Huon Peninsula and then northern Borneo. I have recently taken this to GA, and would welcome suggestions to further improve it. Thank you for your time. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 22:40, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support: This is an excellent article and appears to meet the A-class criteria. Kges1901 (talk) 23:03, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for taking a look, Kges. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 02:44, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments -- Copyedited as usual so pls let me know any concerns; that aside, no other issues with prose, structure and detail. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:23, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Source review -- Formatting looks okay but I'm just considering the reliability of the Austin work, as something published by the unit association (as it appears to me -- correct me if I'm wrong). Is Austin known for other works? That said, I don't have an issue with the work being used for non-controversial info, which it mainly is in this article, but I'm a bit dubious about taking it at face value for the more dramatic episodes currently cited at FN22, FN40 and FN50. Pending confirmation of the source's reliability I'd prefer to see these bits corroborated -- at least in the basic facts -- by other clearly reliable sources. Happy to discuss of course, or listen to other reviewers' thoughts. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:23, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

G'day, Ian, thanks for the c/e and review. I've made a few adjustments based on your comments: [1] Regarding the Austin work, the author is a former Army officer with post grad qualifications. He has written at least 16 other infantry battalion histories/military history works, per [2]. The work cited in this article was written using a variety of primary sources (CARO records, operations reports, war dairies, letters, maps, photographs, orders, interviews, award nominations/citations, etc.), and secondary sources including works by Fuller, Horner, Maughan, Hamilton, Long, Walker, Wilmot, Connell, Fearnside, etc. I was also able to verify the info for FNs 22, 40 and 50 in Field, Dexter and Long, and have added citations to these works now also. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 14:35, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tks so much for prompt and thorough response, Rupert. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 15:23, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Image review -- Looks good, all PD-Australia/PD-1996 or simple geometric shapes in the case of the patches. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:23, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- my only concern has been dealt with. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 15:23, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments: Sorry, off to the cottage later today, so this will take me a while...

"Formed in May 1940 from primarily Queensland volunteers," - "Formed in May 1940, primarily from Queensland volunteers,"

"In early 1943" - break paragraph here.

"It was one of three infantry battalions assigned to the 20th Brigade – the other two being the 2/13th and 2/17th Battalions[4] – which was initially assigned to the 7th Division." - no need for the break, just "It was one of three infantry battalions assigned to the 20th Brigade which were initially assigned to the 7th Division, the others being the 2/13th and 2/17th."

"pioneer" - are these engineers? If so, any reason to use this term? Or perhaps add "(combat engineers)"?

G'day, I've added a link. Pioneers are a mixture of infantry and engineers, with combat engineers as a concept developing later. Today's combat engineer regiments are similar to the pioneer battalions that existed during the war, while each infantry battalion usually (currently) maintains a platoon of assault pioneers. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 22:48, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"who arrived on promotion" - what does this mean?

On promotion from major. Clarified, hopefully. AustralianRupert (talk) 22:48, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"World War I.[12] After the first" - split para here?

"The main body of the battalion remained in Darwin, forming part of the town's defensive garrison, until late October 1940, when they were relieved by the 2/25th Battalion,[15] and embarked again on the Zealandia." - somewhat wordy, suggest "The main body of the battalion remained in Darwin, forming part of the town's defensive garrison. They were relieved by the 2/25th Battalion in October 1940, and reembarked on the Zealandia."

"Sailing via Colombo, the battalion disembarked in Bombay, transferring to the Rohna for the remainder of the journey through the Suez Canal, disembarking at El Kantara, in Egypt, in February 1941." - similar - "Sailing via Colombo, the battalion disembarked in Bombay, transferring to the Rohna for the remainder of the journey. Transiting the Suez Canal, they disembarked at El Kantara, Egypt, in February 1941."

"battalion subsequent fell" - subsequently?

"towards Tobruk, during which time" - towards Tobruk. During the retreat"

"painting by Ivor Hele.[28] The 2/15th subsequently" - split para here?

"By now the Australian Army's focus" - move this down into the next section, which it's kind of part of?

"return to their home locations" - "homes."?

Stopping there for the moment. Maury Markowitz (talk) 20:24, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

G'day, Maury, thanks for taking a look. These are my changes: [3]. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 22:48, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

~~Comments~~Support: A good article, which I believe meets all criteria although I do have a few suggestions and comments (mostly nitpicky):

Link Brisbane, Sydney, Western Desert, Mersa Matruh, Finschhafen, and Labuan
Can dates be added to the two UCPs in the infobox? This way, the reader has the info at a glance rather than two paragraphs in (although the info is very well placed right next to the images)
"In the absence of the Darwin personnel, the battalion's rear details shifted from Redbank to Grovely in September – October, returning to Redbank at the end of the month.": If I am not misunderstanding this sentence, those who were not transported to Darwin did some shuffling around? If so, the current wording seems a little confusing and took me a few looks to realize what it meant; can it, I guess, be simplified? In addition, was there any particular reason why these troops were moving around (if not known, not to worry)?
A prefix was used for the Zealandia, why not the Queen Mary, the Rohna, the Acquitania, the Klipfontein, the Charles Lummis, and the Pachaug Victory?
Middle East: a 'see also' link to the Med and ME article would seem approbraite to provide readers with wider context
"as the 9th Division attempted to make good its equipment and training deficiencies": Unlike the other two battalions, was the 2/15th fully equipped before it departed?
"where a German invasion was expected.": Could link to the article here
"that followed the landing of German forces around": Likewise
"Axis efforts to reinforce the Italians in North Africa": A little context in regards to Operation Compass wouldnt go a miss here
"Italian or Yugoslavian partisans": wikilinks for both
"advancing German and Italian armies": nitpicking, but prehaps a change to just "forces" or "troops" (or something to that effect, considering the lack of a "German Army" being in NA at this time etc,)?
"one dead from accident": missing word?
"Throughout August the 2/15th": comma after August?
"on the line from Hill 33 to the coast": Where in NA is this?
"9th Division's diversionary attack, codenamed Operation Bulimba": A little context, what was the larger battle or why was the division launching a diversionary attack?
"later depicted in a painting by Ivor Hele": Any chance we have permission to use a copy?
- Unfortunately no, as it is still in copyright. There's a link to it in the External links. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 05:59, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"The 2/15th subsequently took part in the First": The First took place in July, and the previous para is talking about events in September. Can this be reworded?
"suffering heavy casualties in September during the lead-up to the final assault in late October and early November 1942.": Is this re-referencing Op Bulimba?
"Trig 29": This is?
"Following training, the battalion was deployed to New Guinea": I believe this should be the beginning of a new para
"action in the final stages of the Salamaua–Lae campaign in September 1943 and then the Huon Peninsula campaign from late September 1943 until March 1944": I think reference to the Huon should be dropped (and the link used in the following para on the subject), as the rest of this one talks about the battalions' actios around Lae.
William Woods: Do we know why his VC nomination was deney and he only received the DCM?
- I haven't been able to find out, unfortunately. The source just says "it was not acted upon by the authorities".
  - @EnigmaMcmxc: G'day, thanks for taking a look. I think I've gotten most of these. These are my edits: [4]. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 05:59, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    - I have looked over your amendments, they look great. I have added my support. I must admit I overlooked the link at the bottom; that is a very dramatic interpretation of the fighting!EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 21:39, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.