Talk:Operation Sonnenblume

message: Added material to prelude. Keith-264 (talk) 09:54, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additions 

message: Might this article (especially the Background..Afika Corp section) read a bit better were the English translations of German unit designations to be used--as is typical of most such articles? Giving the German designation parenthetically (if desired) would be more consistent. Juan Riley (talk) 17:13, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably but I'd put translations in parentheses on the first use of a German term like an abbreviation. I've experimented with permutations of using German/Italian/French terms about German/Italian/French units and code names etc, using them in parentheses as illumination and local colour, doing them first in German/Italian/French sections and other methods and never been really satisfied with the result. Keith-264 (talk) 17:25, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Not complaining...but things like this: "5. leichte-Division‍ '​s (mot)" don't scan well for me as an American English reader. I don't think I have run across such in other WWII articles. But who knows. I do like the extra info if added as parenthetical once. I will live with it one way or another. :) Juan Riley (talk) 17:30, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

text: Damned if we do, damned if we don't. ;O) I only stumbled on this article when I was having a rest from the Western Front 1915-1917 and don't have that many sources for the technical details. Unfortunately, work has got in the way so I'm only bitting and bobbing. No cacti on the UiC allotments ;O)Keith-264 (talk) 17:40, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Does it read a little easier now?Keith-264 (talk) 19:02, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  German vs English names 

message: Added more material but it needs a ce when it's finished, particularly the periodisation.Keith-264 (talk) 11:39, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expansion 

message: #The background section needs some expansion.  British victory over whom?  When?  How?  Just a summary and perhaps a link to the appropriate article establishing why Directive 22 was created.
# Formation of the Afrika Korps (change subheading?) 
# I cannot find Mersa Brega (and others) on your map.
# distances between some of these locations?  Part of the problem DAK faced was the distance, and how far their units were stretched.
The article is good, it just assumes too much information.  You certainly haven't over linked this, either.  auntieruth (talk) 15:55, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello auntie, thanks for replying. I don't think it's good, hence the C grade request but I can expand the background and add to the Directive easily enough.
* The Afrika Korps section was already there but I can adapt it accordingly
* I can look for a better map but am limited to what's in commons
* Distances: can do
Thanks, anything else? Keith-264 (talk) 16:12, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

text: I thought that Skorpion was in far worse shape than this but I see what you mean about it still being a bit of a dog's dinner. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 23:40, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Added more detail lead and analysis next.Keith-264 (talk) 17:11, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarifications 

message: Are Rommel's actions on the ground described in the "Battle" section really part of Sonnenblume? I thought that was merely the codename of the troop transfer. Srnec (talk) 22:24, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: It was supposed to be but he exceeded his authority.Keith-264 (talk) 22:36, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title 

message: In this article it just says "British Empire". This is not the way commonwealth and Indian participation is called out in the infobox of other similar articles. E.g., second battle of El Alamein. Juan Riley  (talk) 00:39, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right, it should be Commonwealth and empire troops (the 3rd Indian Motor Brigade was involved at Mechili).Keith-264 (talk) 18:16, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Australian troops also? Juan Riley  (talk) 18:39, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

text: They're Commonwealth.Keith-264 (talk) 22:00, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: In other similar articles Australians and Canadians etc are called out specifically in infoboxes. The issue is consistency. Juan Riley  (talk) 22:05, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

text: So Keith-264 we should re-visit the infoboxes of all the other articles of WWII and replace UK with British empire and save a lot of ink by deleting Canada, Australia, .....? Juan Riley  (talk) 19:39, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistent infobox of British etc troops 

message: "103–107 German tanks were knocked out but many were recovered later and repaired.[50]"
Should this more accurate reflect they were damaged, largely through wear and tear; rather than knocked out. Jentz for example, notes that the German records show a mere 3 knocked out during the period, several more damaged. Other sources indicate the large mechanical losses from their dash through the desert.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 18:31, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to follow this up: Jentz, p.82: 1 or 2 tanks knokced out on mines; p.101: 3 knocked out from British action, and an unknown number damaged; pp. 101-102: 83 in the workshops from mechanical issues.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 18:48, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Got Jentz now so can amend accordingly.Keith-264 (talk) 21:05, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  German tank losses 

message: The article mentions that during the battle quote ‘A Squadron of the LRDG had appeared from the south, to harass Axis movements.’
Is this sentence referring to ‘a’ squadron of the LRDG or ‘A’ Squadron of the LRDG? 
Also should the LRDG appear in the order of battle section? 2A02:C7E:2C10:4900:DC29:31C3:4D14:C5EE (talk) 01:42, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It's A Squadron, it follows a semi-colon so would a lower-case 'a' if it wasn't its title. Thanks for the edit. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 07:03, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh and yes it should. Keith-264 (talk) 07:04, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  LRDG participation 

message: The Axis order of Battle is nearly done but I don't understand some order to the British order of Battle. Can someone name and highlight  the main forces involved .(Apart from  the British 2nd Armored Division ). Jheeeeeeteegh (talk) 11:29, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh I found it. The Order just lack the highlighting Jheeeeeeteegh (talk) 11:35, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Case closed. Jheeeeeeteegh (talk) 11:35, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  British order of Battle