Talk:Broad front versus narrow front controversy in World War II/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Hog Farm (talk · contribs) 20:52, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

That was quick. I only nominated it a short time ago. Hawkeye7  (discuss)  23:46, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I check the warfare list at WP:GAN a couple times a week, thought this one looks interesting, and decided to take the review. Hog Farm Talk 00:39, 1 March 2021 (UTC)


 * "knowledge that a second army group was operation in France" - Something's a little off in the phrasing
 * Re-phrased. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  20:26, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * "SHAEF advanced at Jullouville was ill-suited to the conduct of a fast-moving land battle" - Something is also off a little there
 * What's off is that the H in SHAEF already stands for "headquarters" so "advanced SHAEF headquarters" is a tautology. Re-phrased. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  20:26, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Link Metz.
 * Linked. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  20:26, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * "Brooke and Churchill, were visiting the Italian front at the time." - Is that comma truly necessary?
 * It is not. Deleted. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  20:26, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * "This is no reason to doubt his assessment." - It's unclear to me what "this" is referring to
 * Deleted sentence. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  20:26, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * "Pogue felt that the description of "pencil-like" was more applicable to Patton's proposal, which called for just two corps, and which Eisenhower likewise rejected" - Was Patton's proposal the "whereby the main effort of the 12th Army Group would be south of the Ardennes, towards Metz and the Saar" mentioned above?
 * Yes. Made this more explicit. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  20:26, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Somehow, the Taylor and Van Creveld refs seem to have been jammed together
 * Corrected. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  20:26, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Error of some sort in Weigley, looks like a typo of / instead of |
 * Corrected. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  20:26, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Refs all look reliable
 * Images all appear to be appropriately licensed

That's it from me, putting on hold. Hog Farm Talk 18:29, 1 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Did you find the article interesting? Does it make sense to you? Hawkeye7   (discuss)  20:26, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I did find it interesting. It made sense to me, although I do have some familiarity with this general topic from reviewing the logistics in the northern France campaign article. Hog Farm Talk 03:52, 2 March 2021 (UTC)