This article is part of WikiProject Alabama, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Alabama on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlabamaWikipedia:WikiProject AlabamaTemplate:WikiProject AlabamaAlabama articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
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:
This article is related to the Pritzker Military Museum & Library WikiProject. Please copy assessments of the article from the most major WikiProject template to this one as needed.Pritzker Military LibraryWikipedia:GLAM/PritzkerTemplate:WikiProject Pritzker-GLAMPritzker Military Library-related articles
A new book, Betrayal at Little Gibraltar blames Bullard for dooming an American assault on a German position in the First World War, yet your article makes no mention of the battle or of Bullard's possible culpability. What gives? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.162.253.101 (talk) 20:31, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that this information should be a part of the article. It was addressed and then removed as hearsay and biased, yet I wonder. I read the article which cited this culpability; the information was removed, and it too comes from a reliable, reputable source, Military History Quarterly. Considering the 2016 book and the MHQ article, I believe the deleted information should be included back into the Wikipedia article. Perhaps those sources that dispute the assertions of Bullard's culpability in dooming the assault could be located included by 75.110.31.135 who disputes the charges of Bullard's poor performance in assault at Montfaucon. Both views can certainly and appropriately be presented. Horst59 (talk) 21:50, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I altered the article to reflect the criticisms that were struck. I understand that the criticisms are serious and scathing; they also seem to have adequate sourcing based on both the book and magazine article that are offered as citations. Note that I did modify the disobedience to alleged disobedience. Further modifications to this very well could include Pershing's involvement in the matter. It too seems somewhat obfuscated and very well may include a cover-up as is claimed. But maybe that is better placed in the article about the battle itself. Horst59 (talk) 00:21, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
