# Talk:Battle of La Haye-du-Puits

I don't work very fast. My method of working is to add a paragraph each day. The article will take shape slowly. Unfortunately, I do not have the same references as you on hand, but am making a start with the ones I do have. We can work around each other. I'm a little unsure about the American strategy: was it to create a breakthrough, or an advance to secure a start line for one? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:58, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Very much the latter. Ideally they wanted to jump off from the St-Lo - Coutances road (in their dreams) and this battle was a step towards that and to giving their lodgement depth - for security and to allow room for airfields and for reinforcement and logistics build up.
"Scheduled for 1 July, the attack was designed to push the Germans out of Normandy and to open the way for American operations into Brittany." (Doubler, p. 19) Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:00, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
No worries, I have plenty on my self. I tend to work in spasms. Sources - as you say, hopefully we can provide each others missing links. I will be off line from Sunday evening UTC until probably Friday. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:14, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
Most of my books are about the British Second Army in Normandy. I just completed work on British logistics in the Siegfried Line campaign. British commanders tended to set grandiose objectives and then argue afterwards that the whole operation went according to plan. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:00, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
I think I'm starting to make progress on this. What made you want to write about this? The Americans don't seem very interested in it at all. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:57, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Okay, that's it from me. All yours now. A good start would be to write a lead. I'm terrible at those. This is the first muddy boots article I've worked on since Landing on Long Island. For a while I used to work with Rupert, who wrote the tactical part of the article while I handled the strategy and logistics. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Hawkeye7, goodness, you seem to have done a bit more than the suggested paragraph a day. And apologies for suggesting a collaboration and then going AWOL for a week. I shall pitch in now and exhaust my sources, and then we can see where we are. Many thanks for the vast amount of information already added. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:00, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Monday was a public holiday here. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:41, 15 June 2021 (UTC)


#### Query
Cherbourg fell on 27 June, as my 1999 Hastings states on p. 195. Cap de la Hague fell on 1 July. Could you check that Hastings 2006 p. 165 cite? I have made a few other tweaks for flow and will probably make more. Obviously shout about anything you are unhappy with. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:41, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

I don't have Hastings, so I substituted Harrison, who says Cherbourg surrendered on 26 June. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:22, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
That is correct in that the Cherbourg commander (Schlieben) surrendered on 26 July. Cherbourg possibly "fell" on the 27th after several isolated garrisons surrendered. Although heavy fighting, including naval support, continued against diehards in the harbour forts until 19:00 on the 28th. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:16, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
"With the surrender of General Schlieben on 26 June and of his deputy, General Sattler, the following day, all organized resistance in Cherbourg ceased. The primary objective of First Army in the assault phase of OVERLORD had been achieved. But this was not the end. Cherbourg had fallen, but some fighting continued. General Schlieben had surrendered, but some 6,000 of his men remained to fight on in the Cap de la Hague." Go with 27 June? You already mention the Cap de la Hague.   Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:48, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
We may be getting a little over detailed here. How about:
Cherbourg fell on 27 June, after the surrender of General Schlieben on 26 June and of his deputy, General Sattler, the following day. The primary objective of First Army in the assault phase of OVERLORD had been achieved.  Organized German resistance in the northern Cotentin Peninsula ended on 1 July, when the 9th Infantry Division managed to reduce the defenses of Cap de la Hague, north-west of the port.
Gog the Mild (talk) 13:01, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
It seems a little repetitive. I suggest the following:Following the successful Allied invasion of Normandy on D-Day, 6 June 1944, progress inland was slow. The original plan for the campaign envisioned that the British Second Army (Lieutenant-General Miles Dempsey) in the east would secure Caen and the area south of it to acquire airfields and protect the left flank, while the First US Army (Lieutenant General Omar Bradley) in the west captured the deep water port of Cherbourg, and would then "wheel round" to the Loire valley.Successive Anglo-Canadian offensives failed to take Caen, but they kept the best of the German forces in Normandy, including most of the armor, in this area. With no ports in Allied hands, all reinforcements and supplies came over the beaches or via two artificial harbors. On 19 June, a strong storm descended on the English Channel that lasted for three days and caused significant delays to the Allied build-up. In the west, attacks to the south were halted by Bradley before the town of Saint-Lô in order to concentrate on the seizure of Cherbourg. Cherbourg fell on 27 June, and organized German resistance in the northern Cotentin Peninsula ended on 1 July.
I like it. Done. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:43, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

"The main body of the 505th Parachute Infantry reached the northern and eastern slopes of Hill 131 by mid-morning, and they were captured for the loss of 4 paratroopers dead, 25 wounded and 5 missing; 146 prisoners were taken."
This sentence reads as if the 505th have been captured, which doesn't fit the context of the rest of the section. Do we need to clarify who "they" is referring to here? From Hill To Shore (talk) 01:01, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Y Re-worded. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 05:10, 11 March 2024 (UTC)