Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/766th Independent Infantry Regiment (North Korea)

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history‎ | Assessment
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Promoted -- Ian Rose (talk) 04:44, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

766th Independent Infantry Regiment (North Korea)

edit
Nominator(s): —Ed!(talk)
Toolbox

I am nominating this article for A-Class review. —Ed!(talk) 21:02, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comments:
    • no dab links, no issues with ext links, images have alt text (no action required);
    • images appear correctly licenced (no action required);
    • I couldn't see any glaring MOS issues, but I might have missed something;
    • I'm not sure if it is the difference between US English and Australian/British English, but I found that some of the prose was a little abrupt in places or seemed to be missing linking clauses. I didn't attempt to fix in case I changed the variation, however, can I suggest maybe asking someone with a knowledge of US English to copyedit the article?
    • in the lead, "...pushing them back after several days' fight" (I think "several days' fight" should be "...several days of fighting")
    • in the lead, "...Suffering supply and casualty problems of its own." (the "of its own" implies that some other unit also suffered supply and casualty problems, but you don't seem to mention this. I suggest just removing the "of its own" clause);
    • in the lead you use the abbreviation "UN" without formally introducing it. I think you should add "(UN)" beside "United Nations" in the third paragraph;
    • other abbreviations need to be formally introduced, e.g. "ROK" etc.
    • in the Organization section, "equally distributed in six" ("distributed" and "in" don't seem to agree - perhaps "distributed across six" or "organized in six"?);
    • in the Outbreak section, "Around 0400 on June 25, the NK 5th Division began its first attacks on the ROK 10th Regiment in forward positions." (who was in forward positions? Perhaps this might be reworded thusly: "...the NK 5th Division began its first attacks on the ROK 10th Regiment, falling upon their forward positions")
    • in the Advance section, "...NK 5th Division continued south in a slow advance south " (repeated word "south");
    • in the Destruction section, "...replacements and conscripts..." (replacements and conscripts implies a difference, surely conscripts were also replacements);
      • The 2,000 were both regular army recruited from North Korea and civilians forcibly conscripted into the NKPA from South Korean land. I have tried to clarify this. —Ed!(talk) 16:58, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Unit 588" - is this the correct presentation? It seems inconsistent with "766th Unit" due to the lack of ordinal suffix and the word "Unit" appearing first). AustralianRupert (talk) 04:27, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: all my concerns have been addressed. Well done. Cheers. AustralianRupert (talk) 01:05, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I don't have much time on wikipedia these days, but absolutely FANTASTIC work Ed! for creating such a good article on an army we don't usually hear about. Congrats; this makes one part of the history of the Korean People's Army clearer. Only thing I would say is that you should tie in the article, mentioning it at 12th Division (North Korea) and Korean People's Army Ground Force articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Buckshot06 (talk • contribs)
  • Comments Support
    • I made a few tweaks, please check that you are happy with them;
    • The citation error tool reports that the named ref 'Millett195' is used multiple times (fairly minor issue though);
    • Some issues with the references I think: specifically do you have the place of publishing for Alexander, Appleman, Millet x 2 and Rottman?
    • This sentence in the lead seems a little awkward to me and I'm not sure of its exact meaning: "Trained extensively in amphibious warfare and unconventional warfare, the 766th Regiment troops were considered special forces commando units." Should it be "the 766th Regiment was considered a special forces commando unit"?
    • Is the punctuation used in the 2nd para of the 'Origins' section correct - "June, 1950" or should it just be June 1950?
    • This sentence in the 'Advance' section is a little repetative: "Because of the rugged terrain of the eastern regions of Korea, difficulty with communications and resupply made it difficult for South Korean troops to put up effective resistance." (specifically use of difficulty and difficult in the same sentence).
    • The 2nd paragraph in the 'Advance' section is stubby and could probably be linked with the one below it.
    • This sentence seem repeative (in last para of 'Resistance' section): "The 766th Unit specialized in raiding UN supply lines, and effectively mounted small disruptive attacks on UN supplies to equip themselves" (specifically UN supply lines and UN supplies).
    • In 2nd para of the 'Destruction' section you wrote: "The town was strategically important because it was one of the few direct routes through the mountains and into the plain." Maybe you could say which plain this is?
    • This sentence seems problematic: "Upon doing this August 19, the unit ceased to exist." There may be a few missing words here I think.



  • Comments This is a very detailed and interesting article, and it's good to see so much work on a relatively obscure North Korean unit. I'm close to supporting, but have the following comments:
    • Given that the regiment was a tactical unit which was fully committed to the war, it's unlikely that its headquarters remained at Hoeryong as the second sentence implies - am I right in thinking that this was its peacetime base?
    • "Upon creation, the generically named 766th Unit was designed to be a scalable unit which would vary in size, consisting of a number of smaller units capable of acting alone." is a bit confusing
    • Do we know what the nationality of the 'United Nations ships' which destroyed the 3rd Battalion were? They were almost certainly South Korean or US.
    • Is there a reason for the regiment being referred to as the '766th Unit' in the 'Resistance' and 'Destruction' sections? (was it designated after it dropped below regimental strength?) Nick-D (talk) 10:12, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • For consistency's sake, another user requested I refer to it as the "766th Unit" since that was North Korea's official initial name for the unit. However books refer to it as both the 766th Unit and the 766th Regiment, so the terms are interchangeable. —Ed!(talk) 04:59, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support My comments are now addressed; great work with this article Ed. Nick-D (talk) 04:27, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/766th_Independent_Infantry_Regiment_(North_Korea)&oldid=1136064881"