Talk:Mid-Atlantic gap

Language
The language in this article is poor, to the point of hampering understanding. It needs a thorough cleanup. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asgrrr (talk • contribs) 00:48, 7 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Lots of abbreviations need clarity. So does a lot of the technical terms. 31.94.60.13 (talk) 22:10, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Merge
In re merge, please comment here. For what it might look like, have a peek at this, WIP. TREKphiler  hit me ♠  14:21, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Neutral POV?
This appears very much to be written from a British point of view. How did Germany, or or the United States, or the Soviet Union, view the Mid-Atlantic Gap? The issue of submarines vs. merchant convoys in the Atlantic is extremely important to WWII. Beyond the glaring use of only a British perspective, I don't think the article gives due importance to the actions, consequences, perceptions, and planning of the other major players in the North Atlantic, nor to the issue of merchant shipping as a whole. It is as though a former British officer describes what happened from his perspective, without considering that other nations were involved and had their own perspectives, or that WWII was a complex global event rather than solely an assault on the UK. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.252.65.65 (talk) 07:28, 12 August 2011 (UTC)


 * The issue was mainly British & Canadian. NPOV doesn't necessarily mean "cover every POV", AFAIK. The U.S. view would be much the same. Should there be more on the U.S. & German actions, yeah.  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  12:45, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Map would be Nice
Exactly where is the gap?155.97.53.72 (talk) 05:10, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Azores
Project Habakkuk says that permission to launch planes from the Azores is what closed the gap. -- Beland (talk) 00:30, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
 * That page is wrong, & has been corrected.  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  07:18, 11 October 2012 (UTC)