Talk:Convoy HG 76

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Convoy HG 76 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Military history: Maritime / British / European / German / World War II

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

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:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	German military history task force
	World War II task force

Move

I've moved this page to a British English format, as per Tag below. Xyl 54 (talk) 14:37, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve moved this now to the format suggested at the MilHist discussion on naming convoys. Xyl 54 (talk) 11:04, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article is written in British English on the basis of strong national ties to the topic.
And it is the variety chosen by the first major contributor to the article.

Recent edits

Managed to re-introduce some of the blanked material with a new source. Keith-264 (talk) 12:07, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Xyl 54: Any chance you can work your magic on the tables and make them symmetrical? Regards Keith-264 (talk) 12:09, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Xyl 54: Delighted you're having another look as I've got a copy of Rohwer & Hummelchen (1992) to use. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 20:32, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Keith-264:: Thanks, I'm not sure if I am! I can't get the table right; adding the no2 template for colour seems to centre everything in that line, but I can't see an easy way to do the rest. It might be easier to take the colour out. And I'm having trouble with the Seerauber section, too (see below). Regards, Xyl 54 (talk) 20:59, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious

The Seerauber section currently states that when a pack gathered, command was passed to the senior man present who organized the shadowing and the surface attacks. It's referenced to Roskill (who does say that, surprisingly) but as far as I know that isn't correct; the method was attempted a couple of times by the U-boat Arm and they couldn't make it work, so Donitz ended up micro-managing the whole process from shore. I've also taken out the reference to "Keroman submarine base", as it wasn't called that until the 60's (those pages will need fixing, too) In fact, the pack tactic is explained in detail on the Wolfpack (naval tactic) page, so I'm inclined to merge the whole paragraph to there and rely on the link. Thoughts? Xyl 54 (talk) 20:58, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Roskill is somewhat dated so if he's been superseded I'd follow later RS; when I re-edited this my sources were a patchwork. Now you mention it, it does seem a little impractical to exercise tactical command from a 1940s U-boat. I'll keep out your way now I've homogenised the references. regards Keith-264 (talk) 21:05, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Background

@Xyl 54: Just noticed that this section hasn't been cited, any chance you could oblige? Regards Keith-264 (talk) 06:41, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Keith-264: Sorry for the delay; real life getting in the way! It's also easier to write this stuff than to remember where I read it! I've added some refs; if there was anything specific you thought needed citing, let me know and I'll try and dig it out. Regards, Xyl 54 (talk) 23:34, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Xyl 54: Yeah I know that feelin'. I forgot about it too. ;O) Regards Keith-264 (talk) 23:38, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits

@DuncanHill: "sfnm confuses everybody." Eh? Keith-264 (talk) 10:52, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect the comment means that everybody makes mistakes when using the sfmn template.Nigel Ish (talk) 11:15, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Serves me right for editing when I should be asleep in bed. ;O) Keith-264 (talk) 11:23, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Keith-264:, Nigel Ish was right. DuncanHill (talk) 17:00, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DuncanHill: Thanks I thought that there was a problem with the formula. ;O) Keith-264 (talk) 17:01, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]