Talk:Battle of Walcheren Causeway

Military history: British / Canadian / European / German / North America / World War II B‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

B

This article has been rated as B-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	British military history task force
	Canadian military history task force
	European military history task force
	German military history task force
	North American military history task force
	World War II task force

Canadian victory?

First of all, British troops of the 52nd Lowland Division served here, so this was not a "Canadian" battle.

Secondly, the Allied troops never managed to break out of the bridgehead. There's no way this can be considered a "Canadian victory."139.48.25.61 (talk) 19:28, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rating

Applied the ratings criteria and gave it a 'B'. McMuff (talk) 02:17, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dutch Article

The Dutch article concerning this battle has some other details, which are not mentioned in this article:
1. It was the HMS Warspite (and two other boats) which destroyed the German bunkers;
2. There were also soldiers from Norway, Belgium and the Netherlands who fought with the allies;
3. Eventually, Westkapelle was liberated at the end of the day.
I wonder if they should be included or notJeff5102 (talk) 20:03, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Battle of Walcheren Causeway. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:17, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Vlissingen vs Flushing consistency

I am curious if it's intentional that Vlissingen be referred to as such in the Background and Prelude, but by the aftermath is referred to by the British name Flushing? Is it because the area was under British control at the time? If so, I will not edit it, but otherwise I believe the names should be consistent throughout. Uhnyt Eiolog (talk) 04:35, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]