# Talk:Battle of Dobro Pole

Aha - another idiot article. And pray, where do the casualty figures come from? Certainly not from the sources mentioned. I hope this was written by a first grade student - because thinking about Dobro Pole like a single battle between 10,000 british and 4,000 Bulgarians is as simplistic as you could get. This is wikipedia - and anyone incompetent in history can write as they please. But if anyone cares - what actually happened in this battle was a break in the Bulgarian fortification system by British troops, which were able to advance north and into Monastir. There was no capture of a Bulgarian army. The Bulgarians were outmanned and outgunned and retreated - there were subsequent battles, which the advance of the French and British was halted. But the breach of the fortifications, meant that the Bulgarian position had become untenable, and the surrender came shortly after. To portray this a resounding Anglo-French victory is nonsensical - if you had real casualty figures you would know why. Common sense also helps - an army charging a machine-gun fortified position rarely had "minimal casualties" in WW1.
If anyone has sources that support otherwise - please share. I don't mind reading alternative history.
- Mladen

Well, feel free to improve it. Carom 04:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
I've no time right now - as I will need to dig out and reference all sources, and do it in a semi-professional academic manner. But I encourage anyone unfamiliar with history not to try to write articles like this stupidity over here. I mean - you don't have to trust me on this - but just read the article on the Battle of Doiran in Wikipedia, a battle which happened 4 days after this one. It pretty much explains why this article here has nothing to do with history, and puts in perspective just how ridiculous it is.
-Mladen
Mladen, Monastir (or Bitolj, or Bitola) was abandoned by the Bulgarian army and captured by the Allies in the Gornichevo battle in 1916. after a fierce battle between the Serbs and Bulgarians for Kaymakchalan - the highest peak of the Nije Mountain on the present-day Greco-Macedonian border. 
The decisive breakthroug in the battle of Dobro Pole in 1918. of the Bulgarian front was carried out by the Serbian army (7 divisions) strenghtened with 2 French divisions (122. and 17.th colonial) and much artillery near the Koziak mountain on September the 15th after a daylong artillery barage that greatly damaged the Bulgarian fortifications. The 2 Bulgarian divisions (the 2nd and the 3rd) + at least a brigade sized reinforcements were routed by Sep the 17th. The Serbian army then penetrated quickly and deeply in a nearly reckless blitzkrieg-like drive along with the French cavalry (other Allied contigents either advanced much more slowly or were beaten back like the British and the Greeks at the battle of Doiran) crushing all (now much less organised) opposition on the way and by the time it reached Bregalnitsa river the morale of the Bulgarian army began to collapse. The Allies captured aprox. 15.000 mostly Bulgarian soldiers + around 400 guns since the beginning of the offensive until the armistice effective at noon of the 30th September - by which time the Serbian Army had captured the town of Shtip near the Bulgarian border. However it should be noted that the battle of Dobro Pole is generally referring only to the 14-17th September period. 
Veljko Stevanovich 23. 7. 2007. 23:35 UTC+1
I do not know many things about this battle, only that Bulgarians were defeated in it, although they put a very stubborn resistance. Both of these are described well in the article. I am very satisfied with the tone of the article, it is neutral and academic, as it should be. Very pleasant impression for this one, congratulations to the author. Lantonov 09:03, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

"Bulgaria was able to defeat Britain and Greece at the Battle of Doiran, but Serbo-French forces did not halt their advance, and the two forces finally met at Dobro Pole."
am I the only one who is left from this phrase with the impression that Battle of Doiran was before the Battle of Dobro pole? because the articles in WP state that the former was fought from 18 September to 19 September while the latter is fought at September 15th.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.126.9.14 (talk) 13:25, 7 July 2010 (UTC) 

" Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes took Vardarska Macedonia". It did not took, reclaimed. Vardar Mcedonia was part of Serbia when WWI stared therefor it can only be reclaimed.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.86.228.53 (talk) 09:39, 5 August 2012 (UTC) 

There was some snobbery about the fact that I used a free website as a source, with the result that my edit was reversed. 
I have not seen other sources that actually contextualise the position of the Sokol and the Veternik. Are there not any other sources out there that can provide this? I can understand that some sources are seen as more reliable than others, but I don't see anything controversial about the website. The website is there to promote a form of battlefield tourism, rather than presenting a politically charged agenda, that I could tell.

'The main attack was planned on the locality called Dobro Pole (Dobro Polje, Добро Поле - literate translation - Good Meadow). Dobro Pole is a locality between the peaks Sokol (Сокол - Falcon) and Veternik (Ветерник – Windy place) on Nidze Mountain'
Is there not a similar geographical narrative that is available from other "preferred" sources? Keith H99 (talk) 11:47, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
Preferred sources especially in the context of articles that are B-class and above are academic journal and reliable books. Now if the self published blog you were citing had a list of citations underneath each post and/or the author was an academic I wouldn't revert it. But since we do not know the author's credentials and whether his posts are based on academic sources or pure speculation, the blog goes against the standards of WP:RS.--Catlemur (talk) 15:38, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

"Balkan Breakthrough: The Battle of Dobro Pole 1918" by Richard C. Hall, page 129. Avidius (talk) 16:38, 23 June 2021 (UTC)-
Thank you for having taken the time to have read my statement, and to have provided a source (Hall) that provides a geographical narrative as to the dispositions of these geographical features. Keith H99 (talk) 16:43, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Battle of Dobro Pole/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: ErrantX (talk · contribs) 17:02, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Lead
No issues
Prelude
I can't put my finger on it exactly, but I feel like this section lacks an overarching context about the War and its state - you cover 1916 onwards very well. But I suggest something as basic as explaining what WWI was, in a sentence etc.
I made a tiny intro, see if it is better.
The autumn 1915 defeat; this is a bit of a misleading link. I'd suggest rephrasing
I made an attempt at rephrasing it, see if it is better.
epistle; was it actually an epistle? Or is this just flowery language for "message"?
 Done
, while also detailing; suggest "and detailed"
 Done
his inability; just his? Or his country's?
 Done
After examining pieces of information provided by escaped prisoners of war, the Bulgarian command determined that the enemy was preparing to engage in hostile actions"'; suggest - "The Bulgarians, using information from escaped prisoners of war, determined that Entente forces would engage in hostile actions". There are quite a few examples in the prose where it could be tightened, changed in tone and/or clarified like this.
 Done
as new evidence; from the same source?
Same source.
one machine gun company, six battalions and 10 heavy howitzers,; suggest choosing one number format & sticking with it throughout
 Done
, General Friedrich von Scholtz then stated; fragment, suggest that this is a new sentence
What relevance does Scholtz have to make that claim? (Field commander etc.?)
Von Scholtz was a representative of the German command on the Macedonian Front.
failed to take into account the departure of Bulgarian chief of staff Nikola Zhekov; why is this important?
The source lists this as one of the reasons, Bulgaria lost the battle, I am not sure how important it was exactly.--Catlemur (talk) 21:25, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
More later *(sorry being dragged away). Please feel free to comment in-line, I will add more comments as I continue working through the article. Interesting read so far!
@Catlemur:; sorry this week got extremely busy. On Sunday I will have some time to finish the review. --Errant (chat!) 09:58, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
@Catlemur: MASSIVE apologies this took so long to get to!

Battle
a limited number of infantrymen and artillery squadrons were not able to hold their ground; are you trying to say that following desertion there was a limited number, and thus they could not hold? If so, the sentence is unclear in making that link.
I took a shot at adding more clarity.
Taking cover behind dispersed bluffs, soldiers of the Shumadia Division took over Veternik, Kamene and the western part of a nearby mountain range with considerable difficulty.; a bit of a contradictory sentence. When taking cover, it's not usual to advance.. perhaps "Using dispersed bluffs as cover"?
 Done
This section lists a large number of locations, many of which are not mentioned before in the article - unfortunately as a reader I got a bit lost as to where everything was. Is it realistic to write a little more detail about the layout of the area of the battle (i/e. extending the work started in the prelude section) which puts these names in context? This may be more of a FA-level concern, but mentioning it now.
I do not think that I will be able to add more clarity by myself, perhaps someone from Vardar Macedonia can help with that.--Catlemur (talk) 22:07, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Bulgaria lost approximately 40–50 percent; do you have specific casualty numbers for the Bulgarians? To help with comparison to Franco-Serb casualties?
 Done
Recommend linking Hellenic on first usage
 Done
Aftermath
No comment is made as to whether the battle is considered won by either side. Other than a reference to "prevailing" in the area. Is there scope to expand this into a little more detail? What advantages did the battle bring? Is there any detail on total casualties? Analysis of the winner? etc.
@ErrantX: Please see if it is any better now.--Catlemur (talk) 19:41, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

The British Army; which British Army? This is the first time they are referenced in the article
The British are mentioned in the second to last paragraph of the Prelude.They fought in the Battle of Doiran (1918), during the Vardar Offensive.
I really enjoyed this article, nice work! I'll run through a source review once the prose is wrapped up. --Errant (chat!) 14:21, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

I have also made some copyedits, feel free to reverse as needed. --Errant (chat!) 14:22, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
All looking good. I spot checked the sources and it looks fine. Happy to pass this. If you intend to go to FA I have some (personal view) suggestions:

You put all the sources at the end of paragraphs, it might be better to seed them through the paragraph next to the relevant sentence (this is likely to get called out at any FAC)
The lead is a little short and could be expanded by perhaps 25-30%
Find some help on the layout of the area to help with understanding the battle (perhaps find someone to make a cleaner map to go next to the existing original map).
Either way, great work! --Errant (chat!) 10:43, 17 November 2015 (UTC)