Talk:British Expeditionary Force (World War II)

Casualties of the BEF

According to the article, "although constituting only a tenth of the defending Allied force it sustained heavy losses" - but there is no figure given. From the information I have the ratio of casualties between French and British Armies is 100 for 1, 120,000 KIA vs 1,200 KIA. In that situation, what do the 'heavy losses' mean? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Potemkine (talk • contribs) 16:48, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

It means that for their size the BEF did more than their share of the actual fighting. Many of the other armies' men just packed-up and went home to their families when things got rough. Morale was a severe problem especially in the Belgian and French conscript armies, and many of their troops when they saw how bad the situation was just deserted and went home. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.112.76.205 (talk) 22:04, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

I have added casualty figures to the "Aftermath" section - British killed amounted to 11,000 although a substantial proportion of those died on the Lancastria. Alansplodge (talk) 20:48, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Montgomery

I removed this quoted rant from Montomerys memoirs, because it adds nothing to the BEF article and give an unbalanced and onesided assessment of Gorts performance, especially when other secondary sources give a more balanced view of his commandership. StoneProphet (talk) 05:57, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

The "Second BEF" and the campaign after Dunkirk

Not mentioned at all (apart from "see also Operation Ariel"). Something ought to be done. Alansplodge (talk) 19:14, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

as well as already containing this text ?

"The short lived second Expeditionary Force commanded by General Alan Brooke was evacuated from Western France during Operation Ariel."

Chaosdruid (talk) 04:24, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

I have added a new section today. Alansplodge (talk) 19:46, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Occupations

What about Iceland (1940-41) and the Faroes (1940-46)? 84.2.183.128 (talk) 22:24, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Approximate

This phrase appears in the 'Evacuation' section, para 1: "approximately 198,229 men along with 139,997 French and some Belgian troops". The numbers are not 'approximate', they're as precise as they can be. See the MoS for guidelines on working with numbers. RASAM (talk) 20:55, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

And you have also suggested that they are not exact, "as precise as they can be", so they are approximate. The phrase also includes "some Belgian troops", which also indicates the numbers are indeed probably not exact, and so are approximate. MoS will not help in this case I am afraid - it is a matter of record-keeping and whether or not the records can be expected to be exact, or approximate. It is also interesting that this number is not referenced.

There are a few references to the numbers, but they do state that the number was on the 3rd June and the 4th was the official last day of the evacuation.

Churchills book has a nice table, and shows that there are two figures quoted there - the war office total (336,427) and the Admiralty "final analysis" total (338,226). Chaosdruid (talk) 22:25, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

BEF - order of battle, and role in the Battle of France

This is a quick suggestion/critique of the article, but it seems to almost entirely miss the role of the BEF in the battle of France, and unsurprisingly there's an overemphasis on Dunkirk and the other two evacuation operations that are copied from exisitng Wiki pages.

I can see this page can be improved perhaps along these lines:

• more detail on the OOB of the ground forces - eg this article doesn't mention that the BEF was fully motorised and therefore unique in 1939/40
• perhaps a closer look at the strengths and equipments of unit compared to their German counterparts
• more detail about the actual operations of the BEF including the Arras counterattack

Any thoughts? Mungo Shuntbox (talk) 11:46, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Agreed that the "Action" section requires considerable expansion; it doesn't even mention the Dyle Plan which is pretty central to the subject. Alansplodge (talk) 19:39, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

I have made a start - more to follow hopefully. Alansplodge (talk) 22:50, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Military Training Act 1939

The article incorrectly states that conscription was not considered until after the war began. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Training_Act_193950.67.20.28 (talk) 21:54, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Erik Lund

Additions

Dropped in the summary of the Battle of Flanders from French war planning 1920–1940 which needs to be trimmed of French stuff and expanded on the BEF (to follow). Happy to discuss.Keith-264 (talk) 13:30, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Similar with Operation Ariel and Battle of Abbeville replaced some online etc citations with book cites, using sfns.Keith-264 (talk) 16:00, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Lots of stuff from the other articles, will ce it tomorrow. Keith-264 (talk) 20:59, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on British Expeditionary Force (World War II). 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/20160303170018/http://medals.nzdf.mil.nz/warrants/h9-reg.html to http://medals.nzdf.mil.nz/warrants/h9-reg.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:57, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Background

Added a couple of paragraphs but it's a work in progress and the rearmament section needs editing to remove duplication. To do later.Keith-264 (talk) 10:42, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

CE

Submitted for review (C class)Keith-264 (talk) 23:24, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Trod on an Alansplodge edit with an edit conflict but fortunately had same result.Keith-264 (talk) 17:53, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Keith-264. Alansplodge (talk) 18:16, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Cut the sections I pasted in from other articles to summaries and added several links to the other articles to avoid repetition. Keith-264 (talk) 14:40, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Keith-264 but what happened to all my hard work? The "Battle" section now has little mention of what the BEF actually did - the fighting in Louvain, the defence of the Dyle Line, the fighting retreat and the loss of the construction divisions have been edited out. Now we only know what the French did. Alansplodge (talk) 18:02, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

I took out as much as I could that was covered in other articles to avoid repetition but if you want to put some back I quite understand. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 19:20, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Where are any of the actions mentioned above described in other articles? Alansplodge (talk) 11:40, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

See the hat notes. If you want something restored, let me know what and I'll do it. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 13:48, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

I have replaced the sections of text which describe the BEF actions during the retreat from the Dyle. We don't want to give the impression that the BEF withdrew without actually doing any fighting, do we? Alansplodge (talk) 19:44, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Is it not in other articles? Keith-264 (talk) 20:01, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

No, not even mentioned. Alansplodge (talk) 21:26, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Some Comments

1. There's nothing about the selection of Lord Gort to command the BEF. (And he wasn't a field marshal then, as in the infobox - suggest removing ranks from the infobox)  Done
2. And did Brooke (whose name is misspelt) command the BEF? The article doesn't say Does too - 2nd BEF, no it doesn't he got II Corps. DoneKeith-264 (talk) 22:26, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
3. And when exactly was the BEF formed and dissolved?
4. Should it be described as British when it contained a Canadian division? Yes
5. The abbreviation TA for Territorial Army appears before it is defined, and the term should be linked.  Done
6. While we're at it, link the 1st Army Tank Brigade  Done

Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:02, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks babe. Keith-264 (talk) 21:15, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Remedied several omissions Keith-264 (talk) 21:50, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

This puts my mind at ease. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:04, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

It's been a bit of a struggle to find tidy beginning and end dates, it seems to have formed and disbanded by osmosis. I think I might add a para or two on the Home Forces May-June to compensate. If you can think of anything else I would be obliged. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 23:24, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

@Alansplodge: I think it's looking rather good now that the overweighting has been remedied (and the excess cuts restored). Any suggestions? regards Keith-264 (talk) 06:18, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Yes, we're getting there. We still need to mention the surrender of the Belgians which exposed the British left flank. Alansplodge (talk) 09:49, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I that's highly relevant to the fate of the BEF. I think a little more on Home Forces including a brief something on transfers abroad might help too. Keith-264 (talk) 10:43, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Recent edits

@Facts707: Greetings, thanks for your copy-editing. Keith-264 (talk) 10:45, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Air component

It's just occurred that the Air Component needs a mention. Keith-264 (talk) 08:56, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Agreed. I was thinking that it needed an article on its own, but finding sources was not easy. I'll have a go at adding something here in a few days' time unless you want to put something together. Alansplodge (talk) 17:52, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

I'd like to do both but its finding the time. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 18:15, 23 February 2023 (UTC)