Jump to content

Talk:Battle of Bardia

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleBattle of Bardia is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on January 3, 2012.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 3, 2009WikiProject A-class reviewApproved
December 16, 2009Featured article candidateNot promoted
June 19, 2010Featured article candidatePromoted
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on January 5, 2011, January 5, 2014, January 5, 2016, January 5, 2018, January 5, 2021, and January 5, 2023.
Current status: Featured article

Glaring error

[edit]

"Fortunately, these World War I-era small arms, the Lee-Enfield rifle, Bren light machine gun " - the Bren is not WWI error but a mid-30s design (froma mid-20s one) that entered service with the British in 1938. Was the Lewis gun meant? GraemeLeggett (talk) 12:14, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well spotted. Hawkeye7 (talk) 23:14, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Graeme, I spotted that too and have amended it. I don't know of any WW2 ground usage of Lewis guns incidentally. Mungo Shuntbox (talk) 10:36, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They were used during the campaign in Malaya. Hawkeye7 (talk) 23:14, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bold

[edit]

Whats with the bold volumes in the reference section? OKelly (talk) 02:28, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's the citation style. GraemeLeggett (talk) 10:20, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Minor Break In tweak

[edit]
accompanied mostly by the photographer? or not?

Should "escorted by increasingly fewer guards whom the rifle companies could afford to detach" actually read "escorted by increasingly fewer guards whom the rifle companies could ill afford to detach"?

The former implies that the rifle companies were sending back large numbers of prisoners unescorted (yes I know this did happen when the volume of Italian surrenders got sufficient), but I think at this relatively early point it's more likely to be the latter? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 00:47, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Italian casualty figures

[edit]

The Italian casualty figures appear to be cited to the wrong source. Stockings gives 36,000 captured (along with those killed and wounded). The OH does not go into that detail, and basically states overall numbers are unknown. Anyone with a bit more knowledge of the subject and article want to take a look at the citation?EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 23:54, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Stockings (2009), p. 276 might be a more appropriate citation (states 1000 killed, 3000 wounded and 36,000 taken prisoner). Long, p. 199 only seems to give part of the picture as far as I can see (it suggests 1000 killed and gives a total casualty figure, but doesn't break it down into any real detail). Figures for equipment captured is supported by the Long ref though. Anotherclown (talk) 11:30, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I made a change on the basis of this. Does that work? Anotherclown (talk) 11:43, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the delay. I think your edit your works very nicely. :) EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 14:43, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

CE

[edit]

@ Hawkeye; was that me? Keith-264 (talk) 21:24, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Do we have a source/reference for File:WesternDesertBattle Area1941 en.svg? A455bcd9 (talk) 11:29, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]