Talk:Gold Beach

German Defenders of Gold Beach

As written, the article implies that the whole of the 716th Division defended the Gold beaches. Wikipedia's own article on this Division states "The 716th Division covered the Normandy coast north of Caen, from the mouth of the River Orne in the east to the Carentan Estuary in the west. As such the Division had elements present on Omaha, Gold, Juno and Sword Beaches. An artillery regiment was stationed at the Merville Battery."

I believe that the article needs to point out that only part of this Division was actually committed to the defence of this area. While I own a couple of books on DDay, one based on postwar interviews with German Officers actually serving in the campaign, these are in storage. However, I have found one web source that indicates only 3 infantry companies were available - 7 Coy, 736 Grenadier Regt and 3 & 4 Coys of 441 Ost Btn

http://www.6juin1944.com/assaut/gold/en_index.php

I would like some verification from another source before being so explicit in an article.

You will also note that the above source says that the other german unit was 1 Btn of 916 Regt, not 914 Regt as mentioned in this article. 916 Regt is also mentioned by another site:

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/ww2/germandef.html

Is 914 just a mistype? Or is there some evidence to back it up?Glevum (talk) 04:07, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Les Roquettes

Wikipedia is embedded in the current internet and maps.Google.com is the most used site, so much so that it now appears at the top separate from the rest in the Wikipedia gephack page, yet it does not have Les Roquettes in its database. Indeed it finds five places named Les Roquettes in Normandy, but none of them could possibly have been "09.30 – Les Roquettes is captured" as the article says. The 'Les Roquettes I could find on maps, all lie from 10 to 30 miles from the beach. Could someone with real knowledge find the location of Les Roquettes in maps.Google.com and put a link to it in the article? Indeed all of the geographic milestones mentioned in the "Timeline" section of the article cannot be found anywhere on the internet. Only their names in text. Where is the map image that has these names? Thanks Nick Beeson (talk) 11:12, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

There is possible confusion due to the British not necessarily using the full French form of the place names. The Les Roquettes you refer to is right on the coast to the east of and not far from Asnelles-sur-Mer, as is the nearby Hamel, AKA Le Hamel. [1] - current Google maps map of the area with the two areas not marked - here: [2]

Mapa World map of area with street view of Les Roquettes here: [3]— Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.148.221.94 (talk) 11:22, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Gold Beach/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Nick-D (talk · contribs) 07:12, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Comments

It's good to see this article developed to a high standard. I have the following comments:

• "for one of the five sectors of the Allied invasion of German-occupied France" - perhaps note which sector? (from memory, the central of the five) Y
• Given the importance of geography, the coverage of the terrain around Gold Beach could be expanded Y
• Can you discuss the Allied pre-D Day intelligence operations which were conducted to learn more about the terrain on the landing beaches? Were any scout parties landed at Gold Beach? Y
• Perhaps note that the British 50th (Northumbrian) Infantry Division was a veteran formation at the time of D-Day? (some sources argue that it was somewhat worn out as a result of its experiences in the Mediterranean and under-performed during the Normandy campaign as a result) Y -- Diannaa (talk) 22:53, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • It was weeded out on return to Britain and many of the infantry were inexperienced rather than exhausted. The criticism of the division was refuted by Williams 2007, see here
• Williams, E. R. (2007). 50 Div in Normandy: A Critical Analysis of the British 50th (Northumbrian) Division on D-Day and in the Battle of Normandy (MMAS). Fort Leavenworth KS: Army Command and General Staff College. OCLC 832005669. Retrieved 26 May 2014.Keith-264 (talk) 22:18, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
• Holborn, A. (2010). The 56th Infantry Brigade and D-day: an Independent Infantry Brigade and the Campaign in North-West Europe 1944–1945. Bloomsbury Studies in Military History. London: Continuum. ISBN 978-1-441-11908-7. OCLC 1441119086. Retrieved 25 May 2014. the 56th Independent Infantry Brigade was also attached to the division.Keith-264 (talk) 22:38, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for that Nick-D (talk) 10:31, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
• Can you discuss the briefing and training which the landing force received prior to the operation? Y
  • That looks good, but this (and the pre-invasion planning) would be a good area for expansion if you're aiming for A-class Nick-D (talk) 10:31, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
• The order of battle for the German forces can't be correct given that the article says that only elements of these two divisions (totalling 2,000 men out of the 20,000-odd who would have been assigned to the divisions) was in the Gold Beach area.
  • German defensive assignments did not align with the Allied attack sectors. 716th Infantry was spread pretty thin, between the Cotentin and Caen. I have added more on this point to the article. 914th Grenadier Regiment was at Point du Hoc (too far west), so I have removed them. Diannaa (talk)
• "A path was finally cleared from the beach" - who cleared the path? (engineers, or the armoured units?) Y
• Why did the 47th Commando land late? Y
• Can you note the follow-up forces which were landed across Gold Beach in the period after the invasion?
  • I can't find anything on this in the sources I have on hand. Ford/Zaloga says on p.331 that 2.5 million men landed at Mulberry B while it was in operation, but it doesn't say which units. --Diannaa (talk) 23:51, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
    • OK. I suspect that much of XXX Corps (United Kingdom) would have landed across Gold Beach, but the Mulberry obviously makes it a truly massive port. Nick-D (talk) 10:31, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
      • A bit late to the party, I know, but I should be able to add a little info on this subject in the coming days. I am almost 100 per cent positive that 7th Arm began landing late on the 6th - or at least on the 7th via Gold. I should be able to dig up a little further info on som of the other units that landed across the beaches after that, which will lead nicley into just how effective the mullberry was. I will check my sources and throw info in when I can.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 13:26, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
• Can anything be said about the experiences of French civilians in the Gold Beach area?
  • I can't find anything specific. They had been cleared from the houses in the immediate shore area, and civilians in Caen were ordered to evacuate when the invasion started, but most did not do so. That's all I could find. --Diannaa (talk) 23:51, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
    • OK Nick-D (talk) 10:31, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

• A section describing the beach today, and the memorials to the landing there would be a worthwhile addition (the surprisingly well preserved Longues-sur-Mer battery [which I visited in 2011] is a popular tourist attraction for instance, and the remnants of the Mulberry Harbour remain an impressive sight) Y
• A citation is needed for "German losses are unknown." (though I know it's correct from stuff I've read) Y Nick-D (talk) 23:10, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
• Williams (above p. 61) reports that two battalions of the LXXXIV Corps reserve battle group led by the 715th Regiment and 12 88mm guns, counter-attacked the 50th Division and were reduced to 90 survivors.Keith-264 (talk) 23:00, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

• My comments are now addressed, and I'm pleased to pass this review Nick-D (talk) 10:31, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Thank you! -- Diannaa (talk) 15:20, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Assessment

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   B. Citations to reliable sources, where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Comment

If its not too churlish, I think there should be a few lines in about the only meaningful attacks made in daylight against the landings by the Luftwaffe. Not substantial by any means, but it keeps the myth that the only German aircraft to appear over the beaches were the Fw 190s of Priller and his wingman. Dapi89 (talk) 22:52, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

I found a little content on this topic in Trew. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:22, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Chapter 10 pp 131-147: Buckley, John, ed. (2007) [2006]. The Normandy Campaign 1944: Sixty Years On. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-44942-7 by James Corum will help. 6-30 June the Lw flew 13,829 sorties and lost 1,181 aircraft.Keith-264 (talk) 23:37, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

The first operational Allied Advanced Landing Ground (B-1) in France was situated close by at Asnelles and operated Spitfires from D+4 so that may have had some effect on the German response thereafter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.148.221.72 (talk) 11:01, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Naval and Air support at the beaches.

Perhaps a bit nitpicking but given the infobox inclusion for naval support at Omaha (and now Utah): the Free French cruiser Montcalm also supported Omaha (and may have been the first allied ship to open fire on Omaha), Canadian Minesweepers were (I believe) the first to come close inshore at Omaha, and Norwegian and Polish ships gave naval support in the British and Canadian sectors. These are just a few of the inconsistencies with the infobox inclusions/exclusions for the Normandy Invasion Beach articles. I am noting this here instead of editing because I realize the sensitivity of many folk to these issues. Why are these support issues recognized in some beach articles and not others? Juan Riley (talk) 22:59, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

The only one of the five that mentions the ships in the infobox is Omaha. I prepared list articles last year on all five bombardment groups so we do have sourced content available if there's consensus to add more details to the other infoboxes. List of ships of Force U Bombardment Group; List of ships in Omaha Bombardment Group; List of ships in Bombarding Force K; List of ships in Juno Bombardment Group; List of ships in Sword Bombardment Group. — Diannaa (talk) 01:28, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

That is a good start. I only question the lack of consistency. Also a naval person (not being me) might question the lack in the articles of the naval efforts during the landings. Juan Riley (talk) 16:15, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

PS. In my brief readings the minesweepers were also critical. E.g., in the American sectors this was I believe predominantly a Canadian force. Juan Riley (talk) 16:18, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

@Diannaa: Have made edits consistent with your bombardment group pages. We will see the response. Juan Riley (talk) 17:59, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Looks okay. — Diannaa (talk) 18:41, 17 July 2016 (UTC)