Wikipedia:Peer review/61st Infantry Division (United Kingdom)/archive1

61st Infantry Division (United Kingdom)

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.

I have vastly updated the article over the last week, and would like a peer review to prepare it for a GA nomination. Regards, EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 19:03, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: You have a couple of sources in your References list that aren't cited in the article - Barbier 2007b, Zabecki. These should be cited, moved to a Further reading section, or removed. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:03, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that! I meant to add a note explaining what FUSAG once, and apprently forgot about it. The note has now been added, and the two rouge refs are no longer out in the cold.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 22:20, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments This article looks to be in very good shape. I have the following comments:

What the Territorial Army was at the time should be explained (especially in the context of it over-recruiting)
I have added a note on what the Territorial Army was, and additional information on how the units gained the new recruits.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 00:12, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Why was the divisional HQ selected for deployment to Norway (was it trained while the body of the division was still forming?)
I was unable to find an exact reason why Carton De Wiart was chosen although in his own words it appears he decided to take his own staff to speed things up and was not allowed to take his division. Other sources note that the troops for the op had already been earmarked for a while.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 19:26, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"rumors emerged of a German intention to invade Ireland" - only "rumors" or more solid "intelligence"? Presumably the later if it led to a division being moved well away from the potential main invasion zone in south-east England.
Expanded upon.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 19:26, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"the division was reorganized as a light division" - what did this involve?
I have added some extra info on what a light division is, and some additional info specific to the division. It is about all I have been able to dig up.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 19:26, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"The division was intended to be deployed to the Far East to support the fighting against Imperial Japan" - was the division intended to replace the large number of long-serving British personnel who were being discharged from the forces in India and Burma at this time under the "Python" scheme? (which, from memory, was expected to make a number of units unviable, possibly leading to their disbandment) Nick-D (talk) 08:28, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keith checked out the OH for Asia, and found no mention of the division. I have done various searches and have found no link between the division and Python.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 19:26, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments Nick, I have addressed them or left comments. Regards, EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 19:26, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I believe J.O. Carpenter is John Owen Carpenter and C.B. Wainwright is Charles Brian Wainwright. Source is this: [1], although I don't know how reliable that is. Also there is this source for Wainwright: [2] Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 13:54, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the first source reflects what this article looked like a few weeks back, where those full names were used. At the time, I was unable to confirm their full names. Both are on http://www.generals.dk, so I have reinserted their full names.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 03:07, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]