Talk:Battle of Dakar

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Battle of Dakar article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked Related task forces (general topics): Maritime warfare task force Related task forces (nations and regions): African military history task force British military history task force French military history task force Related task forces (periods and conflicts): World War II task force

[edit] Hm......Obious...

Wikivisitor: Look how old is this article and why nearly empty...? Maybe Beacause it is a non Allied Victory result. Yes iam sure of it... if soo look at Battle of Cisterna or Raid over Scheinfurt, Hurtgen Forest, Operation Goodwood and many others. Noone want to give a ____ about them.

What a load of BS. The basic details are there. Some might argue that it's less well-known because the US weren't involved. I would argue that it was a side-show of political importance rather than military. Most of your examples were scarcely shining Alllied successes: Goodwood is described as a German victory, Hurtgen was a poorly run operation. If you (BTW please sign your contributions) want to expand it, go ahead. Just use facts and be open to argument. And don't assume non-existant conspiracies. Folks at 137 15:33, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] yes because there where no participation of U.S

Thats the reason this article is neraly empty, only cited in french and some british books. It took me many time to find this article. Try to merge it to some campaign box or secction because the article is alone without any connection to the reader. PS: You talk BS, Operation Goodwood was an allied strategic failure and a tactical german succes (For the wikipedia).Read the article itself to understand.

I understood the original point to be that Dakar is inadequately written about (in Wiki?) because it was an Allied (Anglo-French) failure/ defeat. In answer I pointed out that several Allied (incl US) failures/ defeats have been documented in detail and I quoted Goodwood amongst others (your point doesn't rebut this). Other articles without US involvement are also very detailed (Barbarossa, Dunkirk, invasion of Greece). My suggested reason for the slimline reporting of Dakar (and Syria, and others) is that it was a sideshow, without lasting impact and hasn't fired much interest. (The slim reporting of the China campaigns is much worse.) So Wiki waits for someone with an interest to expand it, as with East Africa and others. C'mon, have a go! Don't just complain from the sideline! Register, get a name and join in. Folks at 137 23:58, 18 November 2006 (UTC)