Talk:Markham, Ramu and Finisterre campaigns

Propose changes in structure of children articles of this campaign

G'day, I am currently doing a bit of work to expand this article and hope to take it back up to B class over the next month or so. One thing I would like to discuss is the current structure of child/parent articles. The parent article is this one, which is fine, but currently the campaign box lists the following child articles: Battle of Kaiapit; Battle of Dumpu; Battle of John's Knoll–Trevor's Ridge; Battle of The Pimple; Battle of Cam's Saddle; Battle of Faria Ridge; Battle of Prothero I & II; Battle of McCaughey's Knoll; Battle of Kankiryo Saddle and Battle of Crater Hill.

There are a couple of issues that I see with this structure. Firstly, I believe that it is missing an article for the events after Crater Hill, i.e. the pursuit towards Madang. Secondly, I believe that it conflates several minor actions and turns them into battles. For instance, The Pimple, Cam's Saddle, Faria Ridge, Protheroe, McCaughey's Knoll, Kankiryo, and Crater Hill, are arguably one single battle together. Coulthard-Clark in his Encyclopaedia of Australia's Battles calls this battle "Shaggy Ridge". (Additionally, I think it would be virtually impossible to write a proper B class article on The Pimple, Cam's Saddle, Faria Ridge, etc. by themselves).

As such, I propose combining these minor actions into a single article called the "Battle of Shaggy Ridge". The slight issue with this is that that article currently exists as a redirect to this article (i.e. "Finisterre Range campaign"). However, it wouldn't be hard to remove the redirect, and create the article. The minor links in the campaign box could then be created as redirects to the "Battle of Shaggy Ridge" article.

The structure of the campaign parent/child articles would then look something like this:

• Finisterre Range campaign
  • Battle of Kaiapit
  • Battle of Dumpu
  • Battle of John's Knoll–Trevor's Ridge
  • Battle of Shaggy Ridge - writing over the redirect
  • Battle of Madang - not wedded to this title, happy to go with something else if there are better suggestions..

Thoughts? AustralianRupert (talk) 14:26, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

@Anotherclown, Hawkeye7, Nick-D, Ian Rose, and Peacemaker67: Could I trouble you gentlemen for an opinion? Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 14:28, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

That sounds fine. I am not sure what all of them are about. Is the Battle of Dumpu about the advance from Kaiapit to Dumpu? Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:02, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

G'day, Hawkeye, yes I think so. Do you think it would be best to cover that it some other way? Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 22:06, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

No, I might have a go at writing it up. Hawkeye7 (talk) 07:56, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

That would be great. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 08:01, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Agree, and the lack of a Battle of Shaggy Ridge article is a glaring deficit IMHO. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:19, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

I also think this is a good idea, especially in regards to combining the articles on Shaggy Ridge Nick-D (talk) 23:20, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Yes the proposal re Shaggy Ridge seems the correct approach to me. Anotherclown (talk) 04:13, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks all for sharing your thoughts. I have implemented this and have scratched together a new Battle of Shaggy Ridge article. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 07:24, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Looks good. I was going to suggest The Nakai Contingency Unit and the Battles of Kankirei Range as an additional source. Hawkeye7 (talk) 07:56, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for that, I will try to work it in somewhere. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 08:01, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Further ideas for improvement

G'day, I've done a bit of work to expand this now, but I still have plans to take it a bit further. I have a few more ideas:

• add a few more citations to Bradley (I'm waiting for this book from the library)
• consolidated casualties (if they exist)
• check Tanaka for more Japanese info
• add something from Maitland about battle honours
• work in some more refs from Johnston 2007, and add Johnston's book on the 7th Div (unfortunately I don't have either of these sources)
• expand lead?
• expand the aftermath?

If anyone is able/willing to help, please feel free! Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 01:11, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

The new title is quite unwieldly. I think the old one was fine, even if some of the action wasn't technically in the Finisterre Range. Srnec (talk) 15:04, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

I am inclined to agree. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:10, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Whilst I agree the new name is long, to me it seems to more accurately describe the location that the events took place than the old one. That said the AWM seems to use the more truncated "Ramu Valley-Finisterres Operations" [1] to describe this event so I'd not be opposed to something along the lines of Ramu Valley – Finisterre Range campaign either. "Finisterre Range campaign" on its own though seems to only be part of the story, and a reader looking for information on the 7th Division's actions in the Markham and Ramu Valleys wouldn't necessary know to look there. Anotherclown (talk) 00:36, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

G'day, I agree it's long, but went with the current title due to the way it appears to be dealt with in the main sources. Bradley uses various constructions... "campaign in the Markham and Ramu Valley" (p. 242) ,"Markham-Ramu Valley campaign" and "Ramu Valley campaign..." (p. 243) "...in the Finisterres" (p. 243) etc. Happy to revert back if consensus is against this, though. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:12, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Markham and Ramu Valley – Finisterre Range campaign. 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/20160304071150/http://www.vrb.gov.au/dvapublications/CLIK-ng-campaigns.pdf to http://www.vrb.gov.au/dvapublications/CLIK-ng-campaigns.pdf

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) 18:03, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Markham and Ramu Valley – Finisterre Range campaign. 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/20130329225626/http://army.gov.au/Our-history/Further-Reference-Materials/~/media/Files/Our%20history/AAHU/History/Battle%20Honours%20by%20Conflict/Battle%20Honours%20of%20the%20Australian%20Army%20World%20War%20Two%20South%20West%20Pacific.pdf to http://www.army.gov.au/Our-history/Further-Reference-Materials/~/media/Files/Our%20history/AAHU/History/Battle%20Honours%20by%20Conflict/Battle%20Honours%20of%20the%20Australian%20Army%20World%20War%20Two%20South%20West%20Pacific.pdf

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) 16:48, 18 January 2018 (UTC)