Talk:1st Provisional Marine Brigade

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Featured article1st Provisional Marine Brigade is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 15, 2014.
Did You Know Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 6, 2011Good article nomineeListed
February 11, 2011WikiProject A-class reviewApproved
September 2, 2011Featured article candidateNot promoted
January 11, 2012Featured article candidatePromoted
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on December 31, 2010.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that during its operational history, the 1st Provisional Marine Brigade has ranged in size from 1,200 men to almost 10,000?
Current status: Featured article
WikiProject iconUnited States: Military history Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Military history - U.S. military history task force.
WikiProject iconKorea Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a collaborative effort to build and improve articles related to Korea. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Associated working groups:
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Korean military history task force.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject North Korea.

GA Review

This review is . The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

I'll review this article today. Reviewer: Nick-D (talk) 00:30, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments/suggestions

This is the first time I've conducted a GA review, so please do point out anything I do wrong!

I've got some suggestions to tighten the article's wording:

  • "that existed periodically in World War II and in the Korean War" - this implies that it was formed and reformed several times in each war. I'd suggest something like 'that existed periodically between 1912 and 1950"
  • "for an occupation action in Cuba." - "for occupation duties in Cuba" perhaps?
  • "In July of that year, it was moved for an anticipated invasion of Guam," - where was it moved to?
  • "On June 21, the 22nd Marines landed on beaches around Agat" - I think you mean July 21

Other comments:

  • Should File:49th Inf Brigade (Logo Polar Bears).jpg be in the infobox if the brigade only briefly wore this patch? Moreover, it isn't the correct patch - [1] shows soldiers wearing a patch depicting a polar bear with its head in a different position.
    • The image in the box is the brigade's only identifying patch, like other Marine units with similar patches it was abolished in 1947 when the USMC banned patches from its uniforms. As far as I know it is the brigade's only identifying unit insignia. At to the accuracy of the patch itself, it's Wikipedia's official version of the patch, which is identical to the one worn by the British division so I imagine differences aren't intentional. —Ed!(talk) 21:03, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Simmons 2003" isn't in the references section
  • On what dates was the 1912 iteration of the brigade formed and disbanded?
    • The exact days aren't listed in any sources. All I know is months for those. —Ed!(talk) 21:03, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Fair enough, it can be difficult to find those kind of details, particularly for pre-WW2 units. Nick-D (talk) 09:49, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • One or more photos of the Marines in Iceland could be sourced from 'Outpost in the North Atlantic'
  • Did the 1947 iteration of the brigade just consist of a single battalion? (ie, were any units attached to the battalion?)
    • Sources seem to indicate they were just the one battalion, and maybe a larger command element but that's the only difference. —Ed!(talk) 21:03, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • It should be noted that the 305th RCT was attached to the brigade for the first three days of the invasion of Guam
  • What was the brigade's order of battle in Korea? (ie, what was attached to the 5th Marine Regiment)
  • The first para of the Korean War section states that "It became a subordinate unit of the Eighth United States Army under Lieutenant General Walton Walker, who placed it in his reserve" yet the next para states that the brigade was immediately sent to the front lines and became part of a division-sized task force
    • Per the definition of a military reserve, the brigade remained not committed to that task force for long, and was instead used to counter contingencies along the front. My sources all state it remained in Eighth Army reserve through the entire battle and in those actions it is most well-known. —Ed!(talk) 04:13, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The coverage of the Brigade's service in Korea seems much more detailed than the previous periods of its history and at times goes into excessive detail on battles which have their own articles - this material should be trimmed
    • Done. But, per the article, these actions are what made the brigade the most notable and thus deserve the most scrutiny. —Ed!(talk) 04:13, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Korean War section also contains substantial text which doesn't cover the brigade at all (for example, the first three paras of the 'First Naktong Bulge' section) - these should be summarized to maintain the article's focus on the brigade.
    • I've done some trimming. —Ed!(talk) 04:13, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Both the two paras of the 'Deactivation' section cover Walker's objections to releasing the brigade from his command

Criteria

here
for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (
    lists
    )
    :
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to
    reliable sources): c (OR
    ):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the
    neutral point of view
    policy
    .
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have
    suitable captions
    )
    :
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

I've responded to everything. Thanks for the review! —Ed!(talk) 04:13, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Great work Ed, I think that the GA criteria are now met. If you're planning on taking this to A class (and I hope that you are) I'd suggest further expansions of the brigade's pre-Korea history. Nick-D (talk) 09:49, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All Marines are infantry, but...

The first sentence states:

"The 1st Provisional Marine Brigade was a Marine infantry brigade of the United States Marine Corps (USMC) that existed..."

Later on, numerous non-infantry units are identified as part of this Brigade in its numerous inceptions. Although all U.S. Marines are considered to be infantry, I recommend that the first sentence be changed to:

"The 1st Provisional Marine Brigade was a United States Marine Corps (USMC) unit that existed..."

to properly reflect that many components in the Brigade were not primarily infantry.

As a former USMC officer with Military Occupational Specialties (MOS) designations in Motor Transport, Infantry and Tanks, I served in numerous Battalion Landing Teams (BLTs) and Marine Amphibious Units (MAUs) that consisted of numerous smaller supporting units around a larger infantry unit.

BTW. I believe Fehrenbach's This Kind of War can be used as a reference that the Brigade was called "The Fire Brigade" as it was used as the reserve for all major North Koreans attacks that threatened to break the Pusan perimeter.

Trivia: At that time, Marines leggings had a green side and a brown side. Marines were often passed the word "green side out" or "brown side out." After several defeats inflicted upon them by the Marine Brigade at Pusan, the North Koreans troops were told to avoid combat with troops wearing leggings. After the U.S. forces learned of us, the Marines were told "no side out," i.e. take the leggings off so the North Korneans would not know they were facing Marines. Fehrenbach mentions this in his book (if I remember correctly).

Nice job on the article!

Thomas R. Fasulo (talk) 17:11, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Like all infantry units, this one is not 100 percent infantry. Instead, it gets its name because it is an operational unit designed to fight as an infantry unit. Like all units, it needs support forces but that does not change the nature of its job. —Ed!(talk) 05:01, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, every Marine is a Rifleman, only Marines with the 03 prefix for their MOS are Infantry. I've only heard former Marines who didn't serve in the Infantry try to claim they could do my job in addittion to whatever their MOS was. They sure weren't Infantry when they were riding in a HUMMVEE or smoking and joking in an air cooled office and I was humping 30 miles carrying 3/4 of my body weight in weapons and gear in 100+ degree heat!  :)--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 01:06, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]