Talk:Battle of Losheim Gap

message: This article is a mess. It is confused in scope, time scale, and geography. It has consecutive redundant short paragraphs. It has been substantively edited by only one editor this year. My first inclination was to nominate it for deletion, but I see a previous request was removed in 2019 at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Military of the United States. It is one of the many interlocking articles about the Battle of the Bulge, most of which have been carefully and thoroughly edited, and 31 articles link to it.  Closely related, well-written articles that overlap this topic include Battle of Lanzerath Ridge, Battle of Elsenborn Ridge, and Joachim_Peiper#Battle of the Bulge. Although I can see the problems, I do not have sufficient editorial experience in military history of the Battle of the Bulge to fix them. 
===Major concept issues===
Geographically, Loshein Gap could refer to three different concepts, each at a different spatial scale. The first step to improve the article should be clearly identifying which concept is under discussion and focus the content to that. 
 
1) The weak area in US defenses, a gap between two commands defined by a line running about 10 to 20 km west from the earlier static front near Losheim village. At this largest scale, Kampfgruppe Peiper advanced about 60 km from near Blankenheim (Tondorf) over 4 days. Their combat action began at Lanzerath (3 km west of Losheim) late on 12/16, bypassed Losheimsgraben 3 km north of Lanzerath, and advanced through Bucholz Station, Honsfeld, and Ligneuville on 12/17, captured Stavelot (12/18 pm), and attacked La Gleize and Stoumont on 12/19. Peiper retreated in disarray from Stoumont on 12/24. This concept identifies with Losheim only in that Losheim was the point of departure from German lines, not an actual battle location, but it might be the most common understanding among military-history editors. 
2) A linear feature of physical geography northwest of Losheim. It is one of many local road alignments passing through a generally forested area with hills rising 50 to 200 ft on each side (See Google Earth). The present forest, which might differ from that of 1944, is about 20 km SW to NE on the long axis and 3 to 5 km across. The present cleared area in forest along the Losheim-Losheimsgraben road is 40 to 60 m wide (apparently narrower in 1944) and 4 km long. The Battle of Lanzerath Ridge showed how a small force can impede a non-armored enemy in that setting. 
3) The inhabited place Losheimergraben, transliterated as Losheim's ditch, trench, or canal (thus, a gap). The present forest surrounds several rectangular fields with dimensions of 100 to 300 m at a road intersection. It was apparently only captured by German infantry on 12/18 and was not a major asset to the advance of Kampfgruppe Peiper. 
===Secondary issues===
 
The discussion of the US advance toward the Schnee Eifel 3 months earlier is nearly meaningless, as that feature is almost entirely south of Losheim and extends about 40 km SW/NE and 20 km NW/SE for an area of perhaps 800 km2. The overview map, however, could be useful to understanding many place names. 
I see at least 2 instances of direction errors where "east" should be "west" between named locations. 
===Alternatives===
1) If we choose the largest concept, the article's introduction should clearly describe that. If we retain the current title, make clear that Losheim is a label for the battle series, not the inclusive geographic location. Improved content under this concept could be placed here at Battle of Losheim Gap, in Joachim_Peiper#Battle of the Bulge, in a new article Kampfgruppe Peiper (December 1944), or elsewhere. This story is worth telling as one more of the interlocking Bulge articles, which collectively must cover that entire time and space without excess redundancy.
2) The intermediate concept would be limited in time and space to actions on 12/16 and 12/17 within perhaps 3 km of the forested area NW of Losheim. It would point to other articles for the wider view. 
3) The smallest concept could be a location stub or describe specific actions at Losheimergraben, again with links to other articles. 
Justaxn (talk) 18:15, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup needed 

message: 1) If we choose the largest concept, the article's introduction should clearly describe that. If we retain the current title, make clear that Losheim is a label for the battle series, not the inclusive geographic location. Improved content under this concept could be placed here at Battle of Losheim Gap, in Joachim_Peiper#Battle of the Bulge, in a new article Kampfgruppe Peiper (December 1944), or elsewhere. This story is worth telling as one more of the interlocking Bulge articles, which collectively must cover that entire time and space without excess redundancy.
2) The intermediate concept would be limited in time and space to actions on 12/16 and 12/17 within perhaps 3 km of the forested area NW of Losheim. It would point to other articles for the wider view. 
3) The smallest concept could be a location stub or describe specific actions at Losheimergraben, again with links to other articles. 
Justaxn (talk) 18:15, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Alternatives

message: So I looked at the talk page and decided to edit the article so that it would be based around the topic of the battle, not the geographic area. So that included deleting around two thirds of the lead, and some other parts which were focusing on the place, not the battle. I think that a page for Losheim Gap should be made, so that all the info that I took out could be put there. I also deleted the Schnee Eifel battle out of there, as it isn't too related to the battle of Losheim gap and is far away. I also added a background section as I see with most Battle of the Bulge articles. I also added, "The Plan of Action" section, which portioned out the plan of battle, from the actual battle (which were in the same section.) I'm not sure whether the cleanup banner should still be there(?), but I think I've done enough clean up to probably take it down. TheIncanEditor (talk) 21:20, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Did a whole bunch of fixing 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Losheim Gap. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110706133531/http://www.criba.be/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=85%3Acavalry-in-the-gap&catid=1%3Abattle-of-the-bulge-us-army&Itemid=6 to http://www.criba.be/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=85%3Acavalry-in-the-gap&catid=1%3Abattle-of-the-bulge-us-army&Itemid=6
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110706133531/http://www.criba.be/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=85%3Acavalry-in-the-gap&catid=1%3Abattle-of-the-bulge-us-army&Itemid=6 to http://www.criba.be/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=85%3Acavalry-in-the-gap&catid=1%3Abattle-of-the-bulge-us-army&Itemid=6
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:05, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Since this article focuses on World War II battle surrounding the geographical feature of that name, it should be renamed the Battle of Losheim Gap. — btphelps (talk to me) (what I've done) 17:31, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename article