Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Hadong Ambush


 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.  No further edits should be made to this discussion.


 * Promoted -MBK004 03:08, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Hadong Ambush

 * Nominator(s): — Ed! (talk)

I am nominating this article for A-Class review. — Ed! (talk) 03:33, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * It would be good for the group refs to be in numerical order, ie not [15][1] etc  YellowMonkey  ( new photo poll )  00:54, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. — Ed! (talk) 00:46, 7 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments This article is in good shape, but I think it needs a little more work to reach A class:
 * Did the US commander really order that the retreat be "disorganized" as the current wording of the introduction states?
 * Fixed. — Ed! (talk) 00:48, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * It seems inaccurate to say that the 24th "division was consequently alone" given that it had air support and was (I think) fighting alongside South Korean units at times.
 * Fixed. — Ed! (talk) 01:48, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * More generally, the 'background' section doesn't mention the South Korean military at all - what condition was it in at the time?
 * Fixed. — Ed! (talk) 01:48, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * "The battalions, now consisting mostly of recruits who had no combat experience and grouped into two battalions" is confusing
 * Fixed. — Ed! (talk) 01:48, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The article is written almost entirely from the US perspective - is it possible to say anything about the North Korean experience of the battle?
 * Added some info about their background moves. — Ed! (talk) 01:48, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Maps would be helpful Nick-D (talk) 03:54, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Map added. I think I've responded to everything. — Ed! (talk) 01:48, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Support My comments are now addressed Nick-D (talk) 10:16, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments Is the statement in the lead about "untrained" troops accurate? Inexperienced might be a better word choice, as the soldiers would have gone through basic training. Bit of a nitpick, I know, but there is a difference between untrained and inexperienced.
 * Agreed. I have fixed this. — Ed! (talk) 01:55, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * In the "ambush" section, "Machine gun" should be all lower case - "machine gun".
 * Fixed. — Ed! (talk) 01:55, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * When you jump from unit to unit, especially in the last couple of sections, it can be difficult to tell if you're talking about a US or NKPA unit. You might clear that up by changing the "Withdrawal" section title to "American Withdrawal."
 * Done. — Ed! (talk) 01:55, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Concur with the previous comment that maps would be helpful, even if it's just a general map of South Korea with the location of the ambush marked.Intothatdarkness (talk) 13:39, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. I think I have responded to everything. — Ed! (talk) 01:55, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Support Looks ok now.Intothatdarkness (talk) 14:07, 19 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments A1. Fifelfoo (talk) 03:58, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Publisher locations.
 * Added the ones I can find. — Ed! (talk) 02:07, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Notes are in style
 * Original publication date in Square Brackets for Fehrenbach, T.R. (2001), ?
 * Done. — Ed! (talk) 02:07, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * A2: Was there nothing in Chae, Han Kook; Chung, Suk Kyun; Yang, Yong Cho (2001), Yang, Hee Wan; Lim, Won Hyok; Sims, Thomas Lee et al., eds., The Korean War, Volume I, Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, ISBN 0803277946?
 * Fixed. — Ed! (talk) 02:19, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Writing: "preregistered" is a term of art for military science relating to artillery bombardments, explain what walking into a preregistered ambush means suffering a horrible artillery bombardment, and wiki link the technical term
 * Fixed. — Ed! (talk) 02:19, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * preregistered isn't linked or explained. Fifelfoo (talk) 00:34, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Fixed. — Ed! (talk) 13:15, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments - From the top, as usual,
 * Infobox and Lead
 * Casualty figure in infobox needs a citation, or a note explaining that it's fleshed out in detail later in the article.
 * Done. — Ed! (talk) 00:54, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The beligerants section mentions South Korea, but I see no mention of South Korean forces directly involved in the action anywhere else in the article
 * Well, the police force which was fighting in the town was what I was referring to there but they weren't directly related to the ambush. I can always take it out. — Ed! (talk) 00:54, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * North Korean forces were able to separate the American unit's elements from one another and kill most of its leadership, further disorganizing them. - the wording of this sentence is somewhat awkward. Can it be fixed in any way?
 * Fixed. — Ed! (talk) 00:54, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * When you mention "3rd Battalion, 29th Infantry", I immediately assume we're talking divisions here. Are 29th Division and 29th Regiment different? If so you should probably specify Regiment in the worded link itself
 * Traditionally, "29th Infantry" refers just to the regiment. If it was any other unit it would be referred to as such. I've clarified this though. — Ed! (talk) 01:07, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok. That's my confusion. North of the 49th we only use numerical designations for units with multiple battalions (3rd Battalion, Royal Canadian Regiment) or brigade/division forces. Our regiments use names rather than numerical deisgnations, so that's where my confusion comes from... Cam (Chat)(Prof) 20:09, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Outbreak of War
 * However, US forces in the Far East had been steadily decreasing since the end of World War II, five years earlier, and at the time..., could the middle bit maybe be reworded to "steadily decreasing since the end of World War II in 1945, and at the time..." just to make it less choppy?
 * Fixed. — Ed! (talk) 02:10, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * By that time, the Eighth Army's force of combat troops were roughly equal to North Korean forces attacking the region, with new UN units arriving every day.[8] - do we know what the rough strength of these units was at the time? It would help for comparison's sake so the reader can appreciate how fast the buildup happened.
 * Fixed. — Ed! (talk) 02:10, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Replacements Arrive
 * By July 22 the units were on the front lines with new equipment that was not prepared for combat, despite promises from several commanders that they would be given time to do so.[11][14][15] - which wasn't ready for combat, the troops or the equipment? I'm guessing troops, but the wording makes it a bit unclear.
 * Fixed. — Ed! (talk) 01:07, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Arrival
 * Are the village of Hadong and the junction of Hadong the same place? If so, then you don't need to explain the location twice.
 * Clarified. They were seizing Hadong pass, which is a mile from Hadong village.
 * You use about five different words to describe Hadong (town, city, village, etc). Pick one size designation and stick w/ it.
 * Fixed. — Ed! (talk) 01:07, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * NK 6th Division commander General Pang Ho San ordered his forces to aggressively scout to Chinju as quickly as possible.[19] - I'm thinking "scout to Chinju" is probably using the wrong verb. Maybe "scout Chinju" or "advance to Chinju"?
 * Fixed. — Ed! (talk) 01:07, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * During this trip, shortly before dawn, the troops encountered a truck of 15 South Korean militia who claimed they were the remains of a 400-man unit that had been wiped out by North Korean forces in the area.[21] - the "during this trip" is unecessary
 * Fixed. — Ed! (talk) 01:07, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Ambush
 * The North Koreans immediately ducked for cover in the ditches on the side of the road, and L Company opened up on them.[20][23] - "opened up on them" sounds a bit too informal for my tastes.
 * Fixed. — Ed! (talk) 01:19, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The 3rd Battalion had walked into a preregistered North Korean ambush, and almost its entire command ground was eliminated within a minute of the first shot being fired. - what exactly is "command ground"?
 * Typo. I meant "Command group." Fixed. — Ed! (talk) 01:19, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * American Withdrawal
 * They also had to cross a 20 feet (6.1 m)-wide stream in the retreat, and some drowned in the process. - "20 feet-wide stream" just doesn't sound right. Try some of the other conversion template options. It may just be an adj=on issue.
 * Fixed. — Ed! (talk) 01:19, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Aftermath
 * Over 30 vehicles and practically all of the crew-served and individual weapons used by 3rd Battalion were lost.[31] - the "crew-served and individual weapons" part is a bit convoluted and confusing.
 * Fixed. — Ed! (talk) 01:19, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Fix these issues and I'll be happy to support. Cam (Chat)(Prof) 00:24, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I think I have corrected all of these issues. — Ed! (talk) 01:19, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Support - all my concerns have been addressed. Excellent work on this article! Cam (Chat)(Prof) 21:38, 18 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments Support
 * I have made a few changes, please confirm you are happy with them and revert if required;
 * They look good to me. Thanks. — Ed! (talk) 14:51, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The first sentence of the lead is a little problematic IMO. Perhaps it could be reworded to: "The Hadong Ambush was an engagement between United States and North Korean forces that occurred on July 27, 1950 in the village of Hadong in southern South Korea, early in the Korean War."?
 * Agreed. Fixed. — Ed! (talk) 14:51, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Were the soldiers of 3rd Battalion, 29th Infantry Regiment really 'raw recruits'? Surely they were just inexperienced soldiers.
 * Fixed. — Ed! (talk) 14:51, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Grammar seems problematic here: "leaving lower-ranking soldiers mounting a disorganized struggle against North Korean troops on higher ground and in prepared positions." Could it be reworded: "leaving lower-ranking soldiers to mount a disorganized struggle against North Korean troops occupying the high ground in prepared positions."
 * Fixed. — Ed! (talk) 14:51, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Terms like 'enemy' need to be removed to maintain a neutral POV (you use it in the 'Arrival' section); and
 * Done. — Ed! (talk) 14:51, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * This sentence is a little repetative: "He had few soldiers of his own, and accompanied the battalion with only a few of his aides", maybe reword one of the instances of the word 'few'? Anotherclown (talk) 06:50, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. I think that's everything. — Ed! (talk) 14:51, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I have made a couple more minor changes so please check them out Ed. Overall though this is another fine article and I happy to support. Well done. Anotherclown (talk) 20:45, 19 October 2010 (UTC)


 * The discussion above is closed. 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.