266:"While lack of training and the availability of time able to be committed to this are clearly responsible for the criticism levelled at the 32nd Division, McCarthy contrasts this with what had been achieved earlier by the Australian Imperial Force (AIF) in a similarly short time." - this sentence is a bit unclear. Again Threlfall notes that the AIF was also not ready for conditions in New Guinea and took heavy casualties as a result, and it seems unfair to compare combat-hardened formations with a green formation.
210:. The article (rightly) places emphasis on the poor training of the Allied troops and mistakes made by the commanders, but this was only part of the story. As Threlfall demonstrates, their jungle warfare doctrine was woefully inadequate, meaning that even if the troops had been fully trained this training wouldn't have been terribly useful. Similarly, poor doctrine and training also led many otherwise-competent officers to make bad decisions during this battle.
341:"The battle of Buna (commonly referring to the Buna–Gona–Sanananda area) was one of the bloodiest battles of World War II" - as above. This battle was pretty small scale compared to the Eastern Front (where battles which resulted in tens of thousands of fatalities and the destruction of entire divisions were common), or even the major battles of the Pacific War. I wonder if this is really a reliable source?
154:
418:
I'm a bit surprised by the strong criticism of the 25-pounder. This gun remained the standard artillery gun for the
Australian Army for the remainder of the Pacific War, and it was well-regarded from what I've read. It also seems to have been successful in Burma and even Malaya, so it doesn't seem to
448:
learn a lot of lessons from what went wrong during it: doctrine, training and equipment were improved, and this was a low-mark of the careers of officers who went on to lead highly successful campaigns (even the much-maligned MacArthur and Blamey - who gets of a bit light here at present - never did
399:
Have you looked at the main article? Sources say 2/7 Cav had trained as infantry and were subsequently designated as commando. It was the last available without stripping other defences. These things are discussed in the main article as the battle develops and puts these things in context. What do
508:
Adding some feedback to your comments as I go at this time as only AR has added further comment. I thank you again for your feedback and hope that we might collaborate to improve the article. I will say, that while your comments are very valid, I am not certain how I can use them? You may have
217:
I welcome the comment. It is a complex issue. Well trained and battled hardened troops could achieve significant gains, making up doctrine as they went. The issue was to suppress or neutralise attacked positions and those positions supporting them. Logistics, appropriate resources and command
218:
pressure all confounded the problem. I could make a number of observations about more appropriate equipment but these are all hindsight. I have made comments as you indicate in the "Aftermath" of the main article but would welcome any further improvements you might offer here.
316:"most serious of General MacArthur's failings, he never got out from behind the desk to find out what was going on" - is this guy serious? While MacArthur didn't visit Gona-Buna, he regularly appeared at the front lines of other campaigns - sometimes recklessly so.
126:
122:
391:
The article briefly notes, but doesn't really cover, the amalgamation of
Australian units which suffered heavy casualties. The (miss) use of the 7th Division's cavalry regiment as infantry could also be discussed: this was a pretty desperate
107:
99:
419:
have been intrinsically unsuited to jungle warfare as the article suggests. Is the issue that the gun wasn't suited to the particular circumstances here and/or the
Australian forces didn't know how to properly employ it?
236:
The lead is highly critical of US Army officers, but the performance of most of the senior
Australian Army officers was also somewhere between reckless and incompetent. Threlfall discusses this, and Garth Pratten's
115:
180:
176:
92:
298:
I haven't seen anything in the sources to warrant it. The AIF, while not trained for jungle warfare, was trained and experienced - many in the recent fighting along the Kokoda Track.
183:, which were existing pages (renamed). It is hoped that a peer review will identify any issues arising from the move. The other articles have also been nominated for review. Regards,
366:"More than 3,000 Papuans worked to support the Allies during the battle" - a short section on these men seems in order. It's worth noting that most were forcibly conscripted.
721:
703:
663:
634:
609:
584:
559:
537:
518:
499:
481:
465:
435:
409:
382:
357:
332:
307:
282:
257:
227:
192:
673:
the quote should be attributed in text. For instance, "Milner writes, "in almost two weeks of fighting they had failed to score even one noteworthy success.".."
248:
Sorry but I am not seeing what you mean? The lead refers to
Sutherland's initial intelligence and the pressure applied by MacArthur. Happy to discuss more?
44:
643:" It is estimated that the Australians deployed in excess of 7,000 troops": who has estimated this? For instance, "Smith estimates..." or something similar
76:
490:
for your time in reviewing the article. I would like to get some more feedback on this an the other articles before I address these comments.
171:
I've listed this article for peer review as a step to GA. It has recently undergone a major re-order to deal with size moving material from
323:
The source levels this criticism wrt to Papua and the
Phillipines though this changed as the war progressed. I have tried to clarify this.
687:"Unfortunately, the dye was more...": it's best to avoid words like "unfortunately" as they create the impression of a point of view
543:
in the lead, "The Allied advance on the
Japanese positions at Buna–Gona was..." probably best to provide some dates here for context
568:
in the lead, "Australian 7th
Division and the 126th and 128th Infantry Regiments..." link the 126th and 128th Infantry Regiments
509:
access to sources that I don't. I welcome further discussion as I address your individual points and any edits you might add.
69:
736:
593:"Lieutenant General Richard K. Sutherland, MacArthur's chief of staff...": include MacArthur's full name and position here
449:
anything this bad again, and by mid-1943 were leading highly successful campaigns). This presently isn't really covered.
50:
717:
533:
62:
456:
Again, this is raised in the 'Aftermath' of the main article. Is this sufficient without duplicating it here?
172:
17:
699:
659:
630:
605:
580:
555:
514:
495:
461:
431:
405:
378:
353:
328:
303:
278:
253:
223:
188:
202:
This article is in solid shape, and provides useful coverage of its topic. I have the following comments:
713:
529:
373:
Changed text to conscripted. Don't see enough in the sources. All the good stuff is about Kokoda.
695:
655:
650:
See note. This is my estimate based on simple (though somewhat fuzzy arithmetic - therefore not
626:
601:
576:
551:
510:
491:
457:
427:
401:
374:
349:
324:
299:
274:
249:
219:
184:
672:""In almost two weeks of fighting they had failed to score even one noteworthy success." --: -->
477:
651:
161:
730:
712:
Good luck with taking the article further. Thanks for your efforts so far. Regards,
291:
I'm surprised that there isn't a section on the training and equipment of the AIF.
505:
487:
473:
426:
I am only reporting the sources. Perhaps delay fuses is a factor?
654:?) in the absence of any number in the sources being identified.
148:
444:
A key feature of the Battle of Buna–Gona was that the Allies
528:
G'day, nice work, just a few comments/suggestions from me:
241:
should also have useful information at the tactical level.
206:
Much greater use could be made of Adrian
Threlfall's book
618:" training regimen, MacArthur insisted...": same as above
181:
Battle of Buna–Gona: Japanese forces and order of battle
239:
Australian
Battalion Commanders in the Second World War
141:
134:
103:
177:
Battle of Buna–Gona: Allied forces and order of battle
28:
Battle of Buna–Gona: Allied forces and order of battle
70:
8:
77:
63:
32:
35:
7:
24:
152:
524:Comments from AustralianRupert
1:
519:12:42, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
482:23:15, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
466:01:51, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
436:01:51, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
410:01:51, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
383:01:51, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
358:01:51, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
333:01:51, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
308:01:51, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
283:01:51, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
258:01:51, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
228:12:42, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
193:08:41, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
722:12:23, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
704:12:08, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
664:12:08, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
635:12:08, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
610:12:08, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
585:12:08, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
560:12:08, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
538:12:23, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
500:04:40, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
164:discussion has been closed.
18:Knowledge (XXG):Peer review
753:
348:Clarified for US forces?
737:May 2017 peer reviews
173:Battle of Buna–Gona
198:Comments by Nick-D
169:
168:
142:Watch peer review
87:
86:
744:
714:AustralianRupert
530:AustralianRupert
273:Clarified text?
156:
155:
149:
139:
130:
111:
79:
72:
65:
47:
33:
752:
751:
747:
746:
745:
743:
742:
741:
727:
726:
526:
208:Jungle Warriors
200:
153:
145:
120:
97:
91:
83:
51:Manual of Style
43:
31:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
750:
748:
740:
739:
729:
728:
725:
724:
709:
708:
707:
706:
689:
688:
684:
683:
682:
681:
675:
674:
669:
668:
667:
666:
645:
644:
640:
639:
638:
637:
620:
619:
615:
614:
613:
612:
595:
594:
590:
589:
588:
587:
570:
569:
565:
564:
563:
562:
545:
544:
525:
522:
471:
470:
469:
468:
451:
450:
441:
440:
439:
438:
421:
420:
415:
414:
413:
412:
394:
393:
388:
387:
386:
385:
368:
367:
363:
362:
361:
360:
343:
342:
338:
337:
336:
335:
318:
317:
313:
312:
311:
310:
293:
292:
288:
287:
286:
285:
268:
267:
263:
262:
261:
260:
243:
242:
233:
232:
231:
230:
212:
211:
199:
196:
167:
166:
157:
147:
146:
144:
90:
85:
84:
82:
81:
74:
67:
59:
56:
55:
54:
53:
48:
38:
37:
30:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
749:
738:
735:
734:
732:
723:
719:
715:
711:
710:
705:
701:
697:
696:Cinderella157
693:
692:
691:
690:
686:
685:
679:
678:
677:
676:
671:
670:
665:
661:
657:
656:Cinderella157
653:
649:
648:
647:
646:
642:
641:
636:
632:
628:
627:Cinderella157
625:Fixed above?
624:
623:
622:
621:
617:
616:
611:
607:
603:
602:Cinderella157
599:
598:
597:
596:
592:
591:
586:
582:
578:
577:Cinderella157
574:
573:
572:
571:
567:
566:
561:
557:
553:
552:Cinderella157
549:
548:
547:
546:
542:
541:
540:
539:
535:
531:
523:
521:
520:
516:
512:
511:Cinderella157
507:
502:
501:
497:
493:
492:Cinderella157
489:
484:
483:
479:
475:
467:
463:
459:
458:Cinderella157
455:
454:
453:
452:
447:
443:
442:
437:
433:
429:
428:Cinderella157
425:
424:
423:
422:
417:
416:
411:
407:
403:
402:Cinderella157
400:you suggest?
398:
397:
396:
395:
390:
389:
384:
380:
376:
375:Cinderella157
372:
371:
370:
369:
365:
364:
359:
355:
351:
350:Cinderella157
347:
346:
345:
344:
340:
339:
334:
330:
326:
325:Cinderella157
322:
321:
320:
319:
315:
314:
309:
305:
301:
300:Cinderella157
297:
296:
295:
294:
290:
289:
284:
280:
276:
275:Cinderella157
272:
271:
270:
269:
265:
264:
259:
255:
251:
250:Cinderella157
247:
246:
245:
244:
240:
235:
234:
229:
225:
221:
220:Cinderella157
216:
215:
214:
213:
209:
205:
204:
203:
197:
195:
194:
190:
186:
185:Cinderella157
182:
178:
174:
165:
163:
158:
151:
150:
143:
138:
137:
133:
128:
124:
119:
118:
114:
109:
105:
101:
96:
95:
89:
88:
80:
75:
73:
68:
66:
61:
60:
58:
57:
52:
49:
46:
45:Copying check
42:
41:
40:
39:
34:
29:
26:
19:
527:
503:
485:
472:
445:
238:
207:
201:
170:
159:
135:
131:
117:Article talk
116:
112:
93:
27:
162:peer review
104:visual edit
486:Thankyou @
392:expedient.
731:Category
127:history
108:history
94:Article
36:Toolbox
550:Done?
506:Nick-D
488:Nick-D
474:Nick-D
694:Done
652:WP:OR
600:Done
575:Done
160:This
136:Watch
16:<
718:talk
700:talk
680:Done
660:talk
631:talk
606:talk
581:talk
556:talk
534:talk
515:talk
496:talk
478:talk
462:talk
432:talk
406:talk
379:talk
354:talk
329:talk
304:talk
279:talk
254:talk
224:talk
189:talk
179:and
123:edit
100:edit
446:did
175:to
733::
720:)
702:)
662:)
633:)
608:)
583:)
558:)
536:)
517:)
498:)
480:)
464:)
434:)
408:)
381:)
356:)
331:)
306:)
281:)
256:)
226:)
191:)
140:•
125:|
106:|
102:|
716:(
698:(
658:(
629:(
604:(
579:(
554:(
532:(
513:(
504:@
494:(
476:(
460:(
430:(
404:(
377:(
352:(
327:(
302:(
277:(
252:(
222:(
187:(
132:·
129:)
121:(
113:·
110:)
98:(
78:e
71:t
64:v
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.