This 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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
This structure is a blockhouse not a bunker. The difference is that a blockhouse is predominately an above ground structure while a bunker is predominately an underground structure. -- PBS (talk) 13:42, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just a note to point out to those who might wish to change it that the article's name is taken from that of the museum, which is usually rendered in the original French (i.e. no translation) in English-language guidebooks. Prioryman (talk) 17:04, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Guidebooks? Taken from that of the museum? If I understand your argument, the palace of Versailles should be renamed "Le Palais de Versailles" and read the it is a museum preserving a royal château too. Or if your prefer, one should also change the name of the Maginot line into "La ligne Maginot", the name of Fort Eben-Emael into "Le Fort d'Ében-Émael", which is also museum.
The bunker is mainly known as the Watten bunker in reference WWII books. See Google books [1]
The use of the name "Blockhaus d'Eperlecques" is mainly used by guidebooks, not really WWII references. See Google books [2]
IMHO it is rendered in French in guidebooks because the bunker is not easy to find and you need to follow road signs to get to it...
The official website uses, in his English section, the term "Blockhaus or Bunker of Eperlecques". What is wrong with " The Blockhaus d'Eperlecques (English: Bunker of Eperclecques) is a WWII bunker (...) turned into a private museum". The article is all about the WII site anyway.Alberto Fernandez Fernandez (talk) 07:58, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The current mish-mash of references to A-4 and V-2 missiles in this article is ridiculous ? Are they the same thing ? If so, then use one name or the other consistently! I would suggest that V-2 is by far the more common English-language usage.Eregli bob (talk) 02:41, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that the missile wasn't called the V-2 until September 1944 - so referring to it as the "V-2" in 1942 and 1943 is anachronistic. I've amended the text to make this clearer. Prioryman (talk) 06:57, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Someone posted a comment to the article: "[clarification needed Problem with the chronology. Bombing of Watten was decided after the bombing of Peenemunde on August 17-18. to start planning more appropriate that to begin attacks IMHO]"
As the sources say, the bombing of Watten and the other V-weapons sites was indeed ordered in May 1943, before Peenemunde. At the time the Allies didn't know that the sites in the Pas-de-Calais had anything to do with the V-weapons; the reason for choosing to attack them was summed up in Lord Cherwell's comment that "if it is worth the enemy's while to go to all the trouble of building them it would seem worth ours to destroy them". They realised subsequently that the sites were associated with the V-weapons and stepped up the attacks afterwards - but the attacks were not contingent to the decision to bomb Peenemunde. Prioryman (talk) 18:47, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I will be working my way through the article and adding any queries where I see fit. Feel free to make corrections, or correct me as I go along.
Lead
"English: Bunker of Éperlecques", my understanding is if you anglify a foreign language, it alters the spelling. So surely it becomes 'Eperlecques', the 'accent aigu' is redundant?
Nope; check out Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Proper names#Diacritics. "Wikipedia normally retains these special characters, except where there is a well-established English spelling that replaces them with English standard letters." There isn't a well-established English spelling for Éperlecques, which is a pretty obscure place historically, so the accent is retained. Prioryman (talk) 17:03, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Kraftwerk Nord West (KNW) (Powerplant Northwest)", adjacent sets of parentheses are discouraged, per MOS:BRACKETS. I would suggest using a square bracket for 'Powerplant Northwest'.
"Speer gave orders that two bunkers were to be constructed by the Organisation Todt construction group to a "special fortification standard" (Sonderbaustärke) requiring a steel-reinforced concrete ceiling 5 metres (16 ft) thick and walls 3.5 metres (11 ft) thick.", place a comma between '(Sonderbaustärke)' and 'requiring'.
"It was given the codename of Kraftwerk Nord West (KNW) (Northwest Power Plant).", bracket concern here. Perhaps you can fit "Northwest Power Plant" into the prose instead of it being in a bracket?
"...construction at Watten (wryly codenamed Concrete Lump) "for deception purposes", and the...", again perhaps you could remove the brackets and fit it into the prose, unless you feel it's just distracting information.
Well done, thanks! I've replaced the dead link with the archive link you found. I think that covers the last of the outstanding issues? Prioryman (talk) 22:08, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Why does Ref 4 have a different date format to the rest?
I have just added archive links to one external link on Blockhaus d'Éperlecques. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to trueorfailed 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: 5 June 2024).
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.
I have recently been to the site and i am considerably puzzled at the reality of the concrete as against the plans. There is no visible indication that the concrete is any way removable in order to create a door or moveable entrance. I agree the site is incomplete but there is still no evidence for a doorway. As Galileo might argue 'how can it move'.
nojoking 08-Oct-2016 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nojoking (talk • contribs) 19:20, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have just modified 3 external links on Blockhaus d'Éperlecques. 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:
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: 5 June 2024).
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.
I have just modified one external link on Blockhaus d'Éperlecques. 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:
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: 5 June 2024).
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.
