Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/59th (Staffordshire) Infantry Division/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 promoted by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 30 November 2019 [1].

59th (Staffordshire) Infantry Division[edit]

Nominator(s): EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:45, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the British 59th (Staffordshire) Infantry Division, which was raised during the Second World War. This was a second-line formation that spent the first few years of the war at home in the UK. It was assigned to the 21st Army Group, and was the last British infantry division to arrive in Normandy. It took part in Operation Charnwood, followed up by a support role for Operation Goodwood, and then in subsequent fighting as the Second Army pushed south in the final stages of the Normandy battle. As a result of overall heavy losses among Second Army, and a lack of trained reserves, the division was broken up towards the end of the battle and the men largely dispersed among the other formations across the 21st Army Group in an effort to bring them up to strength. The article has been edited by the GOCE, and passed its GA and A-Class reviews.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:45, 1 October 2019 (UTC)EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 00:15, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport from PM[edit]

I went through this pretty comprehensively at Milhist ACR, so I mostly have only minor grammatical points to add:

  • in the lead, "and became the 59th (Staffordshire) Infantry Division"
    AmendedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:46, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • also in the lead, "was assigned to the Second Army"
    AmendedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:46, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • per my comment on the 45th Div ACR, suggest "from cadres that could be increased"→"from cadres around which the divisions could be expanded." and link cadre (military)
    AmendedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:46, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • just check the 45th Div ACR and other ones for improvements to the Background section that have been mentioned in them, but not yet implemented here?
  • should the 177th Brigade be redlinked if there is no article yet?
    Somehow missed this. I have added the relevant link.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:46, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "This freed up the 197th Infantry Brigade"
    AmendedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:46, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • to be transferred to the 59th Division→to be transferred to the 59th (Staffordshire) Motor Division
    AmendedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:46, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • move the link to battalion to first mention
    I have moved this further up the article to the first generic mentionEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:46, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • not sure about the italicisation of Canute II per MOS:ITALICS. Perhaps "Canute II"?
    AmendedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:46, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Bradshaw and two of his brigade commanders"
    AmendedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:46, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The primary objective of the 21st Army Group
    AmendedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:46, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • suggest "including Operations Perch and Epsom" with links piped to the names
    AmendedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:46, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "part of the British Second Army and of the 21st Army Group"
    AmendedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:46, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "and on 4 July the 59th Division"
    AmendedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:46, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "with the 176th and 177th Brigades"
    AmendedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:46, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "6NSR led the 177th Brigade's move"
    AddressedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 02:29, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "1st and 2nd Battalions of the 25th SS-Panzergrenadier Regiment"
    AddressedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 02:29, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the 197th Brigade's 2/5th Lancashire Fusiliers"
    AddressedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 02:29, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "and the 1/7th Royal Warwickshire Regiment"
    AddressedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 02:29, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "attached to the 3rd Infantry Division"
    AddressedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 02:29, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "still resisting the 59th's push south"
    AddressedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 02:29, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Montgomery ordered the Second Army"
    AddressedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 02:29, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Buckley described the division as having"
    AddressedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 02:29, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "under the direct command of the 21st Army Group"
    AmendedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:46, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • what brigade were the 2nd Battalion, Gloucestershire Regiment with? The 56th?
    Yes. I have inserted a sentence just after introducing the 56th, and mentioned what battalions it was made up of.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 02:29, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • had come to ahead→had come to a head
    AmendedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 02:29, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I find the initials of the GOCs a bit jarring, could we use their common names, Ralph Eastwood, James Steele etc?

That's all I could find. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:29, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Image review[edit]

  • File:59_inf_div_-vector.svg should include the date for the original work
    I have added that info inEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 18:24, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Second_Battle_of_Odon_EN.svg: what's the source of the data in this map? Nikkimaria (talk) 16:58, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    The user who created the map has not been active in a while, so I don't believe I will be able to obtain that. So I have removed the map from the article.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 18:24, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sources review[edit]

  • No spotchecks carried out
  • Links to sources checked and working
  • Formats:
  • Ref 126 cites a quote. A page ref is required.
  • Sources: Hart - Maybe wikilink "Mechanicsburg", or at least add a PA to indicate state (it's not a particularly well-known location). Same might be said for some of the other locations, e.g. in minor British towns.
  • Couple of general points, for thought if not necessarily action:
  • Footnote (a) ends: "For further information on how division sizes changed during the war, see British Army during the Second World War." This might be better in a "see also" section, otherwise it looks as though you're using another Wikipedia article as a reference.
I see what you are getting at, I have actioned your suggestion.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 00:35, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not sure about the section heading "External sources". If you're not citing them in your article, they aren't sources. "External links"?
Updated the title header accordinglyEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 00:35, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Quality/reliability: No issues that I can see – sources meet the required FA criteria.

Brianboulton (talk) 15:15, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from AustralianRupert[edit]

Support: G'day, I had a look at this article when it was at ACR. Overall, it looks pretty good to me. I have the following comments/suggestions: AustralianRupert (talk) 09:11, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • in the lead, link battalion and brigade
    DoneEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:12, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • demands for the annexation of Sudetenland --> "the Sudetenland"?
    DoneEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:12, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • mostly lieutenants, to the British Army.[g]) --> I think the full stop would need to be outside the bracket here
    DoneEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:12, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Major-General Lyne praised --> just "Lyne" here as the rank has already been introduced
    DoneEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:12, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • bridgehead." and commented --> the full stop here potentially should be a comma?
    DoneEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:12, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • examination of the Second Army morale --> "Second Army's morale"
    DoneEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:12, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • the Corps' static beach defence --> lower case "corps"
    DoneEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:12, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • the men were subjected to artillery --> move the link for artillery from here to its earlier mention
    DoneEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:12, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • In another instance "There --> lower case "there"
    DoneEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:12, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • for whom CHARNWOOD was --> probably can be "Charnwood" per MOS:ALLCAPS
    DoneEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:12, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • wikilink boobytrap?
    DoneEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:12, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • in the References, is there a page range that could be added for French's chapter in Reid's book?
    DoneEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:12, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • same as above for French's chapter in Goldstein & McKercher
    DoneEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:12, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review, I have actioned your comments.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:12, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, I've added my support now. Thanks for your efforts. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 08:08, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator notes[edit]

This has been on the Urgents list for a while and hasn't received any attention in the last few weeks. It will be archived soon if it doesn't receive additional attention. --Laser brain (talk) 13:05, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Gog the Mild[edit]

Placeholder. I will review this as soon as I can. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:29, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CPA-5. Do you want to go first on this one, and I'll have a look once your comments have been addressed? (Which should leave me very little to do :-). ) Gog the Mild (talk) 19:47, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • All right now it's your turn mate. :) Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 15:45, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks mate. Here you go guys:

I have made some copy edits which you will want to check.

  • "It remained within the United Kingdom until 1944, assigned to anti-invasion and guard duties, and trained for combat overseas." Optional: '... while training for combat overseas.'
    Tweaked per your suggestionEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 04:46, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the most junior formation" Does that mean 'the most recently established formation'? If so, it may be better to say so.*"serving abroad" Being pedantic, perhaps 'serving in France'?
    It was the most recently formed British division that was serving within the 21st Army Group (the 51st Div had technically been reformed using the 9th Div, but the varying sources all point to the 59th as the "junior formation". The other 2nd Line division in the 21st Army Group, the 15th, had been formed about a month before the 59th. I believe only the divisions fighting in Italy were more recently formed, the 2nd line 46th division and the newly raised 78th; which was regular army). I have made a tweak to the sentence, does this work?EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 04:46, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It does. Much clearer.
  • "The division took control of the 176th Brigade and 177th Brigades" 1. Either delete "Brigade" (preferred) or delete the terminal "s". 2. Insert 'the' before "177th".
    Adjusted to your suggestionsEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 04:46, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "who arrived from a General Staff position" Is this the wrong target for the link?
    Quite, I have updated with a more appropriate linkEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 04:46, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "anti-invasion/beach defence duties" Is there any reason why this could not be rendered 'anti-invasion and beach defence duties', in order to lose the MoS unfriendly slash?
    No reason, and updated
  • "would launch the riposte to a German landing." Optional: 'to any German landing'.
    TweakedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 04:46, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "US V Corps" Why is V Corps referred to as US?
    It was the United States V Corps. It also seems along the way, the wrong link has been used, so I have updated that too.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 04:46, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. It didn't occur to me that the link might be wrong.
  • "On a more critical level" "level" seems odd to me; perhaps 'note' or similar?
    I made a tweak, does this work?EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 04:46, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes.
  • "the 2nd Battalion, Gloucestershire Regiment (Glosters)" Should that be '(2nd Glosters)'?
    I have updated to your suggestion at this point, and at the other mentions throughout.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 04:46, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"clear the heavily defended German positions" Optional: would that be better as 'clear the strongly defended German positions'?

Footnotes
  • "By 1939, its intended role was the sole method of expanding the size of the British Armed Forces" Are you sure, or do you mean '... the British Army'?
    That would be more accurate, updatedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 04:46, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's all I have. A cracking article, well up to FA standard. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:50, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your review and comment. I have attempted to act on all your recommendations.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 04:46, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
My minor niggles all addressed. No hesitation in supporting. You are doing fine work with these British divisional articles. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:41, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport by CPA-5[edit]

I'll do this one as fast as I can. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 19:25, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Remove the citation in the infobox - I do not believe it is necessary.
    RemovedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 03:53, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I see 7 howevers can we reduce them?
    Made some tweaks, hope this works.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 03:53, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Link Kent.
    LinkedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 03:53, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • several Canadian officers as part of the CANLOAN scheme Do we know the full name of CANLOAN?
    To the best of my knowledge, it is not an abbreviation. It is a codeword. It seems all source on the subject do not elaborate on the word, but explain the program as it is in the article.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 03:53, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • he first divisional casualties were also suffered, due to German shelling No casualties?
    Numbers do not appear to be reported for the pre-fighting shelling.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 03:53, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Charnwood began at 04:20 hours Remove hours.
    RemovedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 03:53, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • the 177th Brigade's move to capture La Bijude You mean La Bégude-de-Mazenc?
    Negative. The village, if it can be called that, does not have a wiki article.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 03:53, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Operation Pomegranate Link?
    There is no separate article for this operation. The link in the lede is piped to the Second Battle of the Odon, which is already linked in the main body.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 03:53, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • David French stated at least seven men of the 2/6SSR were found guilty of mutiny for refusing to follow orders Because why?
    Full text and context: "Whether men who broke down on the battlefield were punished or treated as psychological casualties largely depended upon the judgement and knowledge of their regimental superiors. Men who broke down but who were well-known to their officers were more likely to be treated as medical casualties, especially if the latter believed they had done their best and had reached the limit of their endurance. Conversely, men who refused to obey the orders of officers whom they hardly knew were more likely to be punished. This was illustrated by the case of a corporal and six private soldiers in 2/6th Staffordshire Regiment in 59th Division, who were found guilty of mutiny when they refused to obey an order to advance issued their company commander. The latter had only joined the battalion on 13 July, barely two weeks before the offence was committed on 2 August, and three of the accused were even more recent reinforcements."
    Personally, I don't believe there is enough context to explain why they refused orders. If you have a suggestion, by all means.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 03:53, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • wrote "For the inexperienced troops of the 59th Division for whom Charnwood was their baptism of fire, the grim and appalling realities of combat were a chastening experience." --> "wrote: "For the inexperienced troops of the 59th Division for whom Charnwood was their baptism of fire, the grim and appalling realities of combat were a chastening experience.""
(talk page stalker) Being a little pedantic, the source states "of 59th Division", no the. (My copy does anyway.) Gog the Mild (talk) 12:47, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You are quite correct about the additional word not meaning to be there. I have removed it. I have also dropped the capital, something others have argued meets MOS guidelines. Other than those tweaks, unsure what else was being suggested here.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 03:53, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's it I think. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 10:17, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you as always for the review and comments. I have attempted to address them all, and have left a few comments above where I have not taken action.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 03:53, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • @EnigmaMcmxc: Looks good to me but could you link long tons and tonnes? Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 15:56, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have updated the template per your comment. If there are any other items that you believe need to be addressed, let me know. Just a heads up, I will not be able to action them until next week.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 02:47, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think we are done here, support. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 16:32, 27 November 2019 (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/59th_(Staffordshire)_Infantry_Division/archive1&oldid=928603789"