Misplaced Pages

Talk:Battle of the Mons pocket: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 04:03, 3 May 2021 editHAL333 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users40,599 edits →Requested move 2 May 2021: oppose← Previous edit Revision as of 04:15, 3 May 2021 edit undoDicklyon (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers476,124 edits →Requested move 2 May 2021Next edit →
Line 31: Line 31:
*:Your "seems to return roughly equal usage" is false, but if it were true, "roughly equal" in sources definitely means that WP defaults to lowercase, per ] and ]. Your linked Google Books search (when I ran it just now; could vary) shows 5 using it with lowercase pocket in sentences, and only one using capped Mons Pocket. Clicking through on one that has a capped heading, and has a preview, you find (for this and all the other pockets). More broadly, are dominantly lowercase except in recent years (most notably 2007 and 2017), and clicking through to see what the recent caps are about, we find a pile of 2007 releases from Stackpole Books that cap it (except for one that doesn't); and in 2017 a book with multiple headings/captions "Retreat Through the Mons Pocket", so those occurrences, which are counted in the n-grams, are not actually supportive of treatment as a proper name. And "Bottle of the Mons Pocket", capped or not, is very rare in sources, just in a title or two as far as I can tell. No evidence of it being a proper name for this action. ] (]) 17:03, 2 May 2021 (UTC) *:Your "seems to return roughly equal usage" is false, but if it were true, "roughly equal" in sources definitely means that WP defaults to lowercase, per ] and ]. Your linked Google Books search (when I ran it just now; could vary) shows 5 using it with lowercase pocket in sentences, and only one using capped Mons Pocket. Clicking through on one that has a capped heading, and has a preview, you find (for this and all the other pockets). More broadly, are dominantly lowercase except in recent years (most notably 2007 and 2017), and clicking through to see what the recent caps are about, we find a pile of 2007 releases from Stackpole Books that cap it (except for one that doesn't); and in 2017 a book with multiple headings/captions "Retreat Through the Mons Pocket", so those occurrences, which are counted in the n-grams, are not actually supportive of treatment as a proper name. And "Bottle of the Mons Pocket", capped or not, is very rare in sources, just in a title or two as far as I can tell. No evidence of it being a proper name for this action. ] (]) 17:03, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' per Nick. ~ ]] 04:03, 3 May 2021 (UTC) *'''Oppose''' per Nick. ~ ]] 04:03, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
*:What do you mean, "per Nick"? You just want to repeat what he said that was demonstrated false? Why not say something related to guidelines or sources instead? ] (]) 04:15, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Revision as of 04:15, 3 May 2021

WikiProject iconMilitary history: European / German / North America / United States / World War II B‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
BThis article has been rated as B-class on the project's quality scale.
B checklist
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
  1. Referencing and citation: criterion met
  2. Coverage and accuracy: criterion met
  3. Structure: criterion met
  4. Grammar and style: criterion met
  5. Supporting materials: criterion met
Associated task forces:
/ 
Taskforce icon
European military history task force
Taskforce icon
German military history task force
Taskforce icon
North American military history task force
Taskforce icon
United States military history task force
Taskforce icon
World War II task force
WikiProject iconBelgium B‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Belgium, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Belgium on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BelgiumWikipedia:WikiProject BelgiumTemplate:WikiProject BelgiumBelgium-related
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Capitalization

I fixed the over-capitalization of pocket, but got reverted with edit summary Revert odd move. The main sources use "Mons Pocket". Please discuss on talk page. This seems odd to me, since of the 5 cited sources, at least 3 use "Mons pocket" (one does cap it, and one I don't have access to yet). As for "battle of the" part, that's also lowercase more than capped in most books, as far as I can tell. Basically, the title is descriptive. Can someone tell me what I'm missing? Dicklyon (talk) 06:01, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

The US Army official history refers to this as the Mons Pocket as does the After the Battle article and Rückzug: The German Retreat from France. These are the main sources on this engagement. Names of military 'pockets' are generally capitalised. Nick-D (talk) 07:23, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
No, you're wrong on that first one -- the US Army page consistently uses "Mons pocket" in the text. Their title-case in the title is irrelevant. So 3 of the 5 cited sources use lowercase (assuming you're right on the After the Battle article, which I don't have). From my study of sources, I'd say it's not true that Names of military 'pockets' are generally capitalised. Maybe you're often distracted by titles? And few sources include "battle of the" for this one; the US Army page you link mentions "battle of" only in "the battle of the hedgerows". Dicklyon (talk) 17:10, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
You lost me with the insult. Nick-D (talk) 22:53, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
What insult? You found my observation that you're distracted by title case was insulting? I apologize for being so blunt then; but the point is objective; you said the Army used caps, but it does so only in the title. Dicklyon (talk) 23:17, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Oh great, now you're move warring. Reverted. Please use the WP:DR processes to seek further views rather than do this again. Nick-D (talk) 01:29, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Nick, was Dick really insulting you? Doesn't look like it. A contradiction isn't a rebuke. In my experience, Dick is a stickler for surveying reliable sources, which is what we're required to do, no? Tony (talk) 10:26, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 2 May 2021

The request to rename this article to Battle of the Mons pocket has been carried out.
If the page title has consensus, be sure to close this discussion using {{subst:RM top|'''page moved'''.}} and {{subst:RM bottom}} and remove the {{Requested move/dated|…}} tag, or replace it with the {{subst:Requested move/end|…}} tag.

Battle of the Mons Pocket → Battle of the Mons pocket – The Mons pocket is not generallky capped in sources, including 3 of the 5 cited sources on this article that use lowercase pocket. See talk section above. Dicklyon (talk) 05:15, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

  • Oppose The term is capitalised in the After the Battle article, which is the longest and most detailed work I've been able to find on these events, as well as well as Rückzug: The German Retreat from France which covers the topic in some detail from the German perspective. It's correct that the US Army official history doesn't use this capitalisation in the body of the text, but does in the title of the relevant section. The USAAF history uses 'Mons pocket' and the other US Army source just refers to 'Mons' as it briefly covers the topic. A Google search seems to return roughly equal usage of both forms of capitalisation across various works. Nick-D (talk) 08:01, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
    Your "seems to return roughly equal usage" is false, but if it were true, "roughly equal" in sources definitely means that WP defaults to lowercase, per WP:NCCAPS and MOS:CAPS. Your linked Google Books search (when I ran it just now; could vary) shows 5 using it with lowercase pocket in sentences, and only one using capped Mons Pocket. Clicking through on one that has a capped heading, and has a preview, you find all lowercase in the text (for this and all the other pockets). More broadly, Oocurrences in books are dominantly lowercase except in recent years (most notably 2007 and 2017), and clicking through to see what the recent caps are about, we find a pile of 2007 releases from Stackpole Books that cap it (except for one that doesn't); and in 2017 a book with multiple headings/captions "Retreat Through the Mons Pocket", so those occurrences, which are counted in the n-grams, are not actually supportive of treatment as a proper name. And "Bottle of the Mons Pocket", capped or not, is very rare in sources, just in a title or two as far as I can tell. No evidence of it being a proper name for this action. Dicklyon (talk) 17:03, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Nick. ~ HAL333 04:03, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
    What do you mean, "per Nick"? You just want to repeat what he said that was demonstrated false? Why not say something related to guidelines or sources instead? Dicklyon (talk) 04:15, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Categories: