Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Operation Winter Storm

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.

Closed as promoted by Woody (talk) 21:27, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Winter Storm

This article still has some work to go through, which will be done tomorrow; nevertheless, this is the fastest I've worked on an article (one day). I feel this is less prepared than Operation Uranus, but nothing that should permanently hold it back. I'd appreciate any reviews, thank you! JonCatalán^(Talk) 06:54, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I just realized this article lacks images. Images will be added tomorrow. JonCatalán^(Talk) 06:58, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support well written, well referenced, but it needs a better map of the tactical situation. Wandalstouring (talk) 08:49, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Again, the "Portrait of..." needs to be removed from the pic of Erich von Manstein. That's the only fault i could find with it and I support recognician of this article.--Patton^t/c 22:39, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support, w/ comments
- Lead
  - "undertaken from 12–23 December"?
- "Participating German Forces"
  - "The 6th Panzer Division was also complete becuase it had been transferred to Manstein's control from Western Europe."
    - What? Why would Western Europe be helpful? (or am I missing something reallllly obvious here...)
- "Endgame: 19–23 December"
  - Endgame?
Cheers! —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 04:24, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

References satisfy RS and MoS. —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 04:30, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review. At the time, there was no combat going on in France; as a result, the area was used by divisions to rest and refit, while also providing security against a possible Allied invasion of the continent. JonCatalán^(Talk) 04:39, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Just one issue: there are several terms which are linked in the lead and then almost immediately again in the Background section. It'd be nice if this could be fixed, but otherwise it looks great. – Joe Nu tter 15:25, 11 January 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.