Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Freddie de Guingand

Article promoted by Zawed (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 02:20, 7 July 2022 (UTC) &laquo; Return to A-Class review list

Freddie de Guingand
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
 * Nominator(s): 

An article on Freddie de Guingand, Monty's chief of staff. Hawkeye7  (discuss)  19:35, 24 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Image review—pass (t &#183; c)  buidhe  20:11, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Support by Nick-D
It's good to see this article on a key British figure of the war here. I'd like to offer the following comments:
 * More where this came from. I also overhauled Miles Dempsey. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:00, 2 June 2022 (UTC)


 * "De Guingand seems to have been blessed with considerable diplomatic skills" - it's previously stated he learned them on the job
 * Re-worded. The lead is actually the original article before I rewrote it. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:26, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * "was able to smooth over many difficulties arising from Montgomery's problematic relationships with many of his peers and superiors" - this dodges the issue a bit, as it implies that the difficulties were "problematic relationships" rather than the actual issue of Monty frequently being a jerk to other important military leaders whom he needed to cooperate with
 * Changed to "Montgomery's personality and his problematic relationships with many of his peers and superiors." Actually, years of researching the command in NW Europe has given me a better understanding of the motivations of British, who come across as snooty and condescending to Americans then and today.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:26, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Ditto the corresponding material in the 'North West Europe' section, where the issue should be expanded upon a bit given it's importance.
 * I tried to illustrate it with the response to the Battle of the Bulge. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:26, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I think that putting this a bit more bluntly would help. The issue seems to have been that Monty was a high performing jerk who often rubbed other high performing jerks (e.g. Bradley) up the wrong way and was a jerk to his boss from time to time without really meaning to be one. Nick-D (talk) 09:50, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Support My comments are now addressed - great work here. Nick-D (talk) 07:07, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Added words to this effect. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:00, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * " the battalion moved on to Quetta" - say where Quetta is
 * Added "in the Baluchistan Province of British India near the border with Afghanistan". Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:26, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * The sentence starting with 'Hore-Belisha clashed repeatedly' is a bit unclear - it looks like the second half of another sentence is at its end?
 * Looks like a bit missing. Fixed this. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:26, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * "He was involved in controversy" - who considered this controversial?
 * I have rewritten the account of this. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:26, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * " he would be making changes, and that if de Guingand happened to one of them, he would attempt to secure him a good position." - the wording seems a bit off here?
 * Rewritten to "Montgomery warned de Guingand that he might be replaced, but that if this occurred, he would attempt to secure him a good position in the UK." Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:26, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * "and General der Panzertruppe Wilhelm Ritter von Thoma, the commander of the Afrika Korps" - note that Thoma had been captured
 * Noted. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:26, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * "Although not a hypochondriac, since his symptoms were quite real" - is this needed?
 * Replaced with a quote from Richardson. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:26, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * "where he was involved in an unsuccessful business venture with David Stirling" - can you say what this involved?
 * Added a bit. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:26, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * " whose chief goal was to block economic sanctions against South Africa prompted by the Anti-Apartheid Movement" - surely the sanctions were the result of Apartheid, not the movement that opposed it.
 * Good call. Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:26, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * "de Guingand strongly criticised the government of South Africa, saying that it had become a pariah state." - can you expand on this, given it seems to have been a change in position?
 * Yes, it was. Added a little bit clarifying this. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:26, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * For FAC, a section discussing historians views of de Guingand would be useful, if sufficient sources exist. He seems to be well regarded by historians from what I've seen. Nick-D (talk) 10:23, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Added a bit. The rehabilitation of Montgomery seems to have brought more interest in his "lieutenants". Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:00, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Support by Pickersgill-Cunliffe

 * British India, adjutant, Cannes, and Charles Leslie Richardson are duplicated links
 * ✅ Corrected. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "until the end of the war" - suggest making it clearer that the war in case is the Second World War
 * ✅ Done. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "an allusion to his French surname and origins" - source says nothing about de Guingand's "origins" being the reason for his nickname, it's totally down to the surname. His personal origins, it seems, are totally British!
 * ✅ Deleted "and origins". Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Lede says he graduated in 1918, main text says 1919. The source itself doesn't note his graduation date at all, just that of his commissioning
 * ✅ Deleted. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not quite sure that "prospects for advancement" is the same as "attractive to officers with little hope of fast promotion in the inter-war years"
 * ✅ Deleted " prospects for advancement"
 * "the battalion in Egypt" - believe this is the 1st Battalion?
 * ✅ Added. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "arranged for a nomination from the Chief of the General Staff (India)" - might be useful to say who this was
 * Source doesn't say, and it changed in May 1934. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "who had passed the exam based on their service record." - this sounds like the officers are passing the exam because of their service record, when in fact they're passing the exam and then being accepted based on their service record
 * ✅ Re-worded. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Nothing in the French source cites "but de Guingand breezed through the material"
 * ✅ deleted sentence. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Suggest adding some dates to the appointments noted in sentence beginning "After passing the course...", which Richardson has
 * ✅ Added. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Link depot
 * ✅ Linked. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Several unnecessary repeated "1940"s in Middle East
 * ✅ Deleted. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Did he actually serve as "Commandant of the newly-formed School of Combined Operations"? Source only says "diverted to set up a School of Combined Operations, with himself as the proposed commandant". I also don't see any mention of him being promoted to colonel there
 * ✅ Corrected to "lieutenant colonel". Sourced to Richardson, p. 46
 * "he commenced joint planning with the Navy and RAF" does not match with the source's "he and his team prepared a plan for evacuation of W Force if things transpired as they feared."
 * ✅ Switched sources. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Is "Army in Greece" some kind of title? Jumps out as being rather clunky if not
 * ✅ Tweaked wording. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "The plan eventually had to put them into action"- what is "them"?
 * ✅ Looks like a stray word. Re-worded. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * de Guingand himself notes that when being told of his appointment as DMI, ME, he was a lieutenant colonel, but this rank/promotion isn't mentioned anywhere in text
 * ✅ Sourced to Richardson, p. 57
 * "In this role de Guingand ultimately proved to be very successful" - doing what? Suggest noting his use of the Long Range Desert Group and work to identify signs of German attack
 * Do you have a source? Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * It's in Mead but I'm afraid my ebook doesn't have page numbers! There's stuff after the paragraph beginning "The immediate focus of the I Staff at GHQ was on Rommel’s intentions at Gazala".

Hawkeye7  (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ I have the book. Found it on page 26. Added. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  19:47, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "arrangements at the Eighth Army headquarters were confused" this doesn't do much to explain why they were confused. You just say that they were confused, and so Dorman-Smith went to Cairo, which doesn't make much sense
 * ✅ Added a bit. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "Brigadier Sir Brian Robertson" was Robertson knighted at this point?
 * No. He was a baronet, having succeeded his father in 1933. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Ref #46 could probably be split up to assist in recognising which piece of information comes from which page
 * "indicated that a flanking attack there was likely"
 * ✅ Added. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "Alam el Halfa ridge" where?
 * It doesn't have an article. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Link Battle of Alam el Halfa
 * ✅ Linked. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "Decisive action was taken" - this is very vague, perhaps briefly note what kind of action?
 * ✅ Added. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "took the opportunity" makes the marriage sound like a spur of the moment event, suggest removing
 * ✅ Re-worded. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Who was "working in Cairo for an intelligence organisation", H. D. Stewart or A. R. Stewart?
 * ✅ Hugh Dalzell Stewart. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "on 26 February 1943" more unneeded year repetition
 * ✅ Deleted. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "The attack was successful and the battle was won" when?
 * ✅ Added. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "Operation Ladbroke the airborne landing, which failed" - interesting that our article on the operation records it as a victory
 * That's weird. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Suggest noting somewhere that it's the Eighth Army conducting Operation Husky, as it's never actually said
 * ✅ Added. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "and George Richards" - rare for you not to provide a rank with the introduction of a new person?
 * ✅ Brigadier. Added. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "Montgomery's rejection of the Overlord plan..." - what does this have to do with de Guingand?
 * It goes to the next bit. I did not want to give the impression that all the friction between SHAEF and the 21st Army Group was about the Americans. Often it was conflict between British officers. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * " Royal Air Force (RAF)" - you've already used the "RAF" acronym, without linking or providing the full term, in Middle East
 * ✅ Resolved. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "Eisenhower sent him two to choose from(comma) Captains J. R. (Ray) BonDurant and Edwin (Bill) Carver"
 * ✅ Added colon. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "Nearly 300 American personnel..." - again not sure what this has to do with de Guingand?
 * ✅ Deleted. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "old hands" - perhaps replace with something more direct like "more operationally experienced officers"?
 * ✅ Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "his successor fared no better" - what's this little tease? If de Guingand chose the successor then it's notable and they should be named, if de Guingand isn't involved in this later failure then I don't see why it should be mentioned
 * ✅ Deleted. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Considering the amount of information about the build up to the Normandy Landings, I was a little surprised to find that D-Day itself is completely ignored?
 * ✅ Added a bit. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "For his role in Operation Overlord..." more repeated years in this paragraph
 * ✅ Deleted. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "Lieutenants-General" - you've already used "Lieutenant-Generals" in Chief of staff to Montgomery
 * ✅ An error. Corrected. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "When American and British relations were strained" - I think some dates would be useful in this section
 * ✅ Added. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "...was sitting beside him" this seems a little overly dramatic. Would a re-write along the lines of "In March 1945 Montgomery informed de Guingand that Brigadier Ernest Bulmer, the consulting physician to the 21st Army Group, had rendered a professional opinion that de Guingand was exhausted and needed rest" work?
 * I think the reader should know that Bulmer was actually there, and Montgomery was not reading a report. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Why list all his mentions in dispatches so awkwardly at the end instead of when they occur? The sentence itself is also rather broken, with a random full stop and confusingly out of place "9 August 1945"
 * ✅ Done. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "still not recovered in July 1945" - repeated year; I won't note every instance of this, promise!
 * ✅ Deleted. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "a post Montgomery had first recommended him for in 1942." - the only DMI recommendation previously noted came from Dorman-Smith. If Montgomery recommended de Guingand for War Office DMI in 1942, why isn't this mentioned then?
 * ✅ Done. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "Whether there was still a place for de Guingand was another matter." - seems unnecessary
 * ✅ Deleted. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "While there he worked on his memoirs." - these seven words are cited to three pages of a book!
 * Yes. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "The title was suggested by Morehead" who?
 * Alan Morehead. He is mentioned earlier in the "Final campaigns" section. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Assume "Morehead" is a spelling error of "Moorehead"; have changed myself.
 * Do we really need to know that Montgomery wrote in longhand? Seems pretty normal...
 * Most of his correspondence is typed. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Support happy to now support this. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 13:29, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Comments Support by Kges1901
A quality effort on a major figure of the war. Only a few nitpicks:
 * Through the intervention of Montgomery, with whom he served in the 1920s and 1930s and formed a friendship - Might be more concise as Through the intervention of Montgomery. with whom he had formed a friendship with during their shared service
 * ✅ Re-worded as suggested. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:22, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Did de Guingand enter Sandhurst before or after the Armistice?
 * ✅ This required some looking up. It was on 10 September 1918. He would not have been eligible to be sent to the front at this time. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:22, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Article says that he entered ranked 15th in his class. Surely this was his rank on graduation?
 * ✅ On entry. Emphasised. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:22, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Those who scored highest were given places but the remaining positions were filled from others who had passed the exam and were then given a place based on their service record more concise as -- > The highest scorers were guaranteed places but the remainder selected based on service record from those who passed the exam
 * ✅ Re-worded as suggested. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:22, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Are there any details in sources as to any specific reasons that he jumped from a training establishment to a GSO1 position quite rapidly?
 * ✅ An error in the London Gazette. It should have been GSO2. Corrected. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:22, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * De Guingand asked to be returned to his regiment and this was done --> could be more concise as De Guingand requested to return to his regiment, and reported to its depot on 21 January, but was immediately placed on leave
 * ✅ Re-worded as suggested. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:22, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * On 25 February his orders were cancelled and he was posted to the new staff college at Haifa in Palestine as an instructor. The war had created an urgent requirement for more trained staff officers --> Due to the urgent wartime requirement for trained staff officers, de Guingand's orders were cancelled on 25 February and he was posted...
 * ✅ Re-worded. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:22, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Are there more details in the sources as to why de Guingand started planning for the pullout of British forces in Greece at such an early date, before the German invasion even started (or was Ultra a factor in this)? Also, did the political consequences of such planning motivate Wavell to order de Guingand to scrap the plans? These sentences should also mention that the successful German invasion was the reason that the troops needed to be evacuated
 * ✅ Added. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:22, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * accurately forecast the Axis capture of Tobruk --> correctly predicted...
 * ✅ Sure. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:22, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * vice Brigadier Jock Whiteley - this is jargon to the general reader, suggest just using 'replaced'
 * Looks okay to me. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:22, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * General Sir Claude Auchinleck was Commander-in-Chief Middle East and commander of the Eighth Army and Dorman-Smith - Change to --> while Dorman-Smith to avoid repetition of 'and's
 * ✅ Re-written. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:22, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Not sure how there were conflicting command structures since Auchinleck was clearly senior to Dorman-Smith?
 * ✅ Within the staff, since there were essentially two chiefs of staff: Dorman-Smith (DCGS ME) and Whiteley (BGS Eighth Army). Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:22, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Link COSSAC
 * To what article? Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:22, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Maybe Frederick E. Morgan? This might be one of the more important D-Day subjects still without an article.
 * ✅ Add a linked reference to Frederick Morgan. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  01:04, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
 * and his partnership with Montgomery has been compared - by whom?


 * ✅ Richard Mead. Added. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:22, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Kges1901 (talk) 02:15, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Source review - pass
The sources used all appear to me to be reliable. I am unable to find any other sources which would materially add to the content of the article. I found no unattributed close paraphrasing. I consider the sources to be current A reasonable mix of perspectives are represented. Everything that I would expect to be cited, is. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:09, 29 June 2022 (UTC)