Talk:Battle of Polygon Wood

Neutrality

The first sentence: The Battle of Polygon Wood was a successful attack in the Battle of Passchendaele.

In which way successful? I suppose there are always 2 belligerents and the wikipedia does not adopt party. Or? La Fère-Champenoise (talk) 07:49, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Ambiguity

Prelude Battleground

"Before the Great War, Polygon Wood was by the Belgian Army" --> was what? 212.159.59.5 (talk) 13:56, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

From the Battle paragraph: "The main assault would be supported (on the right) by 33rd Division (British) and (on the left) with simultaneous attacks by Australian Fifth Division's 3rd and 59th Divisions towards Zonnebeke and Hill 40." A division would not contain other divisions. I presume these are 3rd and 59th battalions.96.54.32.44 (talk) 22:56, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Material moved from page

The main assault would be supported (on the right) by 33rd Division and on the left with simultaneous attacks by Australian Fifth Division's 3rd and 59th Battalions towards Zonnebeke and Hill 40. The intention was to build on the gains made during the Battle of Menin Road. At 5.50 a.m. on 26 September the five layers of barrage fired by the British artillery and machine-guns began. Dust and smoke added to the morning mist so the infantry advanced on compass bearings and rushed the German outposts of 3rd Reserve Division and part of 50th Reserve Division, most falling immediately. Each Australian division attacked with two brigades and one in reserve. A battalion in each advanced 800 yards to the first objective, then two more passed through to the final objective about 400 yards beyond and dug in.

Under this screen the 4th and 5th divisions, in conjunction with British formations, swept forward, and after much hard fighting captured the prearranged objectives round Polygon Wood and Zonnebeke. Our loses were again heavy – over 4,000. The German casualties were later found to have been about the same. (Lieut Gen Birdwood, I ANZAC Corps)

The German defences in the wood disintegrated quickly, Major Hethey, Kampftruppenkommandeur in the southern portion of the wood being killed at 6.30 a.m. but mopping up took until midday. The difficulties of 33rd Division further south meant that the 5th Australian Division had to swing back on its right to cover the area not retaken by the 33rd Division, which at first only managed an advance to Black Watch Corner. The rest of 5th Australian Division consolidated in the German Flandern I defences just east of Polygon Wood. Another battalion from 33rd Division was sent through the Australian area to attack south-east, together with an advance from the Corner and this recaptured the ground lost the previous day by 2.00 p.m. The ground lost near Menin road was regained by the other 33rd Division brigade, also in the afternoon. 4th Australian Division advanced 1,200 yards to Groote Molen (Tokio) spur without serious difficulty. North of the I Anzac Corps, three divisions of V Corps from Fifth Army provided the other flank guard. 3rd Division advanced to the west end of Zonnebeke, against part of the German 3rd Reserve Division but further north got caught in mud, lost the barrage and was stopped short of Hill 40.

Suddenly I heard shouts of 'Englander' from in front. I called the men out and we took up a position in the mass of shell-holes on either side. Almost at once figures appeared moving towards us through the fog. They were coming on at a steady pace bunched together in groups between the water-logged shell-holes. We opened fire and threw hand-grenades into the midst of them and they at once took cover in the shell-holes, I could see two of them fixing up a light machine-gun which opened on us hitting several of my men before we could silence it. For a moment the attack here was held, but looking round I could see more English advancing past us to right and left, and realized that our only hope was to run for it. (Officer, 3rd Battalion, 34th Fusilier Regiment)

A second attack later in the day on Hill 40 met a German counter-attack, leaving both sides where they started. 59th Division advanced swiftly between Waterend House and Schuler Farm, against parts of 3rd Reserve Division and 23rd Reserve Division. 58th Division's 175th Brigade attacked up the Hanebeek valley but mist and disorganisation left it 400 yards short of its objective.

The infantry’s main obstacles on the battlefield were the dozens of German concrete pill–boxes which protected the enemy machine gunners. They had to arrive at the pill–boxes just as the barrage lifted from them and the occupants were still dazed by explosions.

The above moved from page to add more detail succinctly.Keith-264 (talk) 13:42, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

References

Keith-264 (talk) 08:40, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Revision

I have revised the piecemeal additions to the page and tried to synchronise the layout with the model of the other pages. More work is needed and a copyedit. Any suggestions comments and new sources welcome. TaKeith-264 (talk) 13:23, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

On 21 September Haig instructed the Fifth and Second Armies to make the next step across the Gheluvelt Plateau on a front of 8,500 yards. I ANZAC Corps would conduct the main advance of about 1,200 yards to complete the occupation of Polygon Wood and the south of Zonnebeke. X Corps to the south was to attack either side of the Menin Road and Fifth Army in the north was to advance to occupy a line from Zonnebeke to Kansas Cross and Hill 40 near Zonnebeke station. Moved from main page.Keith-264 (talk) 06:00, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Medical details of I Anzac Corps established Regimental Aid Posts close to the line, to which wounded could be brought quickly from the battlefield for attention, before being carried back by field ambulance stretcher–bearers to horse–drawn and motor ambulance collecting points along the Menin Road.{sfn|Bean|1941|p=794} Reference dosn't match the statement.Keith-264 (talk) 10:59, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Revised edition placed on the page, some fine-tuning remains. Comments and suggestions welcome as usual.Keith-264 (talk) 12:59, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Dear Sceptical, thanks for the trouble you've taken.Keith-264 (talk) 07:51, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

"British"???

Is it at all correct to talk about this as a British operation when even the Wikipedia article shows that most of the "British" fighting and casualties were by Australians? 121.218.47.124 (talk) 10:10, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

It doesn't? Kernel Saunters (talk) 10:24, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

British refers to British empire troops, some of whom were from Australia. It is anachronistic to treat them separately from Irish, Newfoundland, Canadian or even English soldiers. Notice as well that there were more metropolitan than dominion divisions involved and that many troops in "Australian" divisions (artillery etc) were from the UK. As it happens I want to expand the sections describing the doings of the Anzac divisions and have the pdf of the AOH open as we speak. Thanks for taking an interest.10:34, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Battle of Polygon Wood. 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/20091111022409/http://www.ww1westernfront.gov.au:80/battlefields/polygon-wood-september-1917.html to http://www.ww1westernfront.gov.au/battlefields/polygon-wood-september-1917.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) 20:06, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Battle of Polygon Wood. 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/20110719173700/http://www.ordersofbattle.darkscape.net/site/warpath/battles_ff/1917.htm to http://www.ordersofbattle.darkscape.net/site/warpath/battles_ff/1917.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ww1westernfront.gov.au/battlefields/polygon-wood-september-1917.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 04:58, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Date(s) of the battle are conflicting/confusing

The article's dates and running description give a confusing/conflicting picture of dates, as: (1). The Lede says the battle "was fought .. 26 September – 3 October 1917", and (2). The Infobox says the battle was "Date: 26–27 September 1917", and (3). 50% of the article is a section called "Battle" that describes only 26 Sept events (although it doesn't mention the date at all, giving only lots of different times of day instead), and (4). Only a small "Aftermath" para near the end mentions German counter-attacks occurring 27 Sept - 3 Oct that failed.

There's no clearer info on other websites either (for example The Long, Long Trail website's "Third Ypres" page includes "Phase: the Battle of Polygon Wood, 26 September – 3 October 1917" but only lists the battle order and gives no battle description whatsoever, and Anzac websites describe the battle as if occurring 26 Sept only, ignoring all events of the days following).

So - it seems clear the main battle (or chief fighting) was on 26 Sept only, and that the period 27 Sept - 3 Oct was concerned with lesser German counter-attacks that ultimately failed. I shall therefore alter the LEDE to reflect this, for better immediate understanding, as follows:

[FROM] The Battle of Polygon Wood took place during the second phase of the Third Battle of Ypres in World War I and was fought near Ypres in Belgium 26 September – 3 October 1917, in the area from the Menin road to Polygon Wood and thence north, to the area beyond St Julien. ... German defensive arrangements were changed hastily after the battle to try to counter British offensive superiority.

[TO] The Battle of Polygon Wood occurred on 26 September 1917 during the second phase of the Third Battle of Ypres in World War I and was fought near Ypres in Belgium, in the area from the Menin road to Polygon Wood and thence north, to the area beyond St Julien. ... German counter-attacks from 27 September - 3 October proved unsuccessful, and German defensive arrangements were changed hastily after the battle to try to counter British offensive superiority.

I shall also alter the INFOBOX from "26-27 Sept" to state "26 September - 3 October" reflecting the whole period (similar to the Long, Long Trail dates), as most Wikipedia battle Infoboxes seem to state entire battle period dates rather than specific "main day(s)" of fighting. Hope this meets with approval of most readers. Pete Hobbs (talk) 17:28, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

The Record of the Battles and Engagements of the British Armies in France and Flanders, 1914-1918 (James 1924 and 1990) p. 22 gives the date range you mention. The British attack took pace on 26 September and the rest of the range refers to German attempts to recover ground; while prompted by the British attack, [they] were also part of a German initiative; we should be careful not to be too Anglocentric. I have altered your edit slightly using James as a source but it has taken a long time to find sufficient sources to do justice to the German side and there are still lacunae. I was surprised about your comments for the time after 26 Sept until I realised that the article for that hadn't been linked (Actions of 30 September – 4 October 1917) but that still leaves a gap which can perhaps be filled using sources not available when the article was improved to B class. The German changes weren't the first and there's a good description of the context in Boff Haig's Enemy (2018) which I intend to incorporate when I get the chance but I've been blown off course by finding a job, I haven't got as much time these days. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 00:26, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

I've had a delve and found a few details but the balance reflects the sources so far. Keith-264 (talk) 08:43, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

References

Good article

This article looks good enough to be heading to GA. Sun Creator^(talk) 01:13, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

I did Messines 1917 up to A class but it put me off doing it again so I content myself with asking for B class. When other editors want to get an article I've worked on beyond B I'll help but that's as far as I go. Keith-264 (talk) 08:48, 8 November 2019 (UTC)