Talk:Police Regiment South

Copy edit
Hi. I shall be starting to copy edit shortly. I think that I will be relatively bold in a couple of places. I shall try to make the edits discrete so that you can readily revert any you don't like. And, obviously, you can always ping me to ask what on earth I was doing. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:28, 12 February 2018 (UTC)


 * "Background and formation": In the first sentence you define "Order Police". The second paragraph starts with "Twenty three Orpo..." without Orpo being defined, although this is clear in context. I would have thought that you would want to define "Orpo" on its first use and italicise it on every use as an isolated foreign word; or stick with "Order Police" in full throughout. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:58, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I changed to "Order Police"; thank you for pointing that out. Separately, I undid one of the edits that suggested that the regiment operated under the command of the Army Group South Rear Area, i.e. the Wehrmacht. While the unit operated in the Army Group rear area, it was subordinated to the SS chain of command. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:31, 13 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the undo. I was sloppy: it says that in the previous sentence.
 * "deployed in German-occupied areas, specifically the Army Group South Rear Area." reads a little clumsily to me. It will do at a pinch, but perhaps: "deployed to the German-occupied Army Group South Rear Area."? (In particular "specifically" seems redundant, and it would be nice not to have two "area"s so close.)
 * "The orders came down from the regimental commander, who had referred to an order from Heinrich Himmler." The second part reads a little oddly; perhaps "who was acting on orders from Heinrich Himmler."?
 * "The same report noted that Police Battalions 45 and 303 and the brigade jointly participated..." There being two brigades in the paragraph I am not sure what is meant. Is it "...Police Battalions 45 and 303 and the SS brigade jointly..."? Gog the Mild (talk) 12:24, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the suggestions; I implemented them. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:15, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you. The following is getting a bit picky for a GA nomination, but see what you think.
 * "a formation of the German Order Police (uniformed police)". I am not sure about "(uniformed police)". If it is there to communicate that the Orpo were a uniformed branch, or to distinguish them from the Gestapo, then there may be a better way of doing it. If it is necessary at all; I think that that is implicit. Or is it there for some other reason? I would be inclined to delete it. Or perhaps "(the German national uniformed police force)"? Or "(the German police force)"?
 * "Subsequently, the codebreaker produced monthly reports detailing the crimes perpetrated by Nazi Germany." As a point of logic, if reports were no longer being transmitted over the radio, how was there any code to be broken? There seems an element of contradiction between this sentence and the preceding.
 * There doesn't seem to be a reference for Persico.
 * I am close to done. I will leave it for a while and come back with fresh eyes for a last read through. It is a nice little article. Gog the Mild (talk) 06:48, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm done. It was a pleasure working with you. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:55, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you; I've implemented the suggestions. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:24, 16 February 2018 (UTC)