Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Landing on Emirau

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history‎ | Assessment
The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Landing on Emirau edit

Nominator(s): Hawkeye7 (talk)
Toolbox

One of World War II's lesser known battles. Rather more one-sided than most, as there was no fighting. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:46, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support
  • Just a small one if the island was not occupied by the Japanese and there was no fighting how do we get a Japanese commander section in the info box
    • He was the the Japanese commander responsible for Emirau and Kavieng. It was his decision which islands to garrison or not. Hawkeye7 (talk) 12:19, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also Australia and New Zealand are listed on the Allied side - unless I missed it the only participation I can find is RNZAF squadrons used to Garrison the island after the landings in December and the Australian 8th Infantry Btn arrived in September

--Jim Sweeney (talk) 11:49, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Great article. Some suggestions you may wish to consider are:
    • Gordon Rottman's U.S. Marine Corps World War II order of battle states that only a reinforced amphibian tractor company was involved, along with a single marine pioneer company
      •  Done. Shaw and Kane say "amphibian tractor and pioneer companies". Looks like a misunderstanding on my part. Hawkeye7 (talk) 02:02, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • When was the 3rd Battalion landed? (eg, was it held in reserve until after the initial landing was completed?)
    • The sentence 'Some shots were fired the natives informed the marines that the Japanese had left the island two months before' is a bit unclear (who were the shots fired at? - the natives?)
      •  Done. I hope not. I have added "at what were believed to be Japanese soldiers". What they actually were is hard to say now. Hawkeye7 (talk) 02:02, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Given that the island was undefended, why was a full regiment assigned to take it? Was this routine caution (and making use of available troops) or were their fears of a repeat of the Admiralty Islands campaign?
      •  Done. That is my understanding, but I can't find a source that says so. I can tell you that it was Halsey who made the decision. Hawkeye7 (talk) 02:02, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Was this the 4th Marine Regiment's first operation after being formed from the raider battalions in February?
      •  Done. Yes. Added words to this effect. This may have also been a consideration in Halsey's decision to employ it. Hawkeye7 (talk) 02:02, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I don't think that 'See also' sections should only include a link to the relevant portal - if the portal is the only link then it should be placed with the notes or references section

Nick-D (talk) 23:16, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support. No major issues, but it would be nice if you mentioned what happened to the base after the end of the war. Was it just abandoned and allowed to fall into disrepair? – Joe N 00:04, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) 01:47, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/Landing_on_Emirau&oldid=1138360313"