This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dunkirk evacuation article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.{{template other|}}
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
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 United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom 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
For the record, I entirely support the way the result is portrayed in the infobox in this article - however it appears to me that this does not fit the rules for the infobox template.ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 22:32, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the comment, but why? At the top of the page you will see it says This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dunkirk evacuation article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. so I am wondering if this is a suggestion for improvement and if so how it works, please? Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 11:18, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What can be considered as logistics failures as depicted in the film?What should have been done
The article fails to note, as people always do fail to note, that, immediately after telling the House that 'Wars are not won by evacuations,' Churchill added, 'But there was a victory inside this deliverance, which should be noted. It was gained by the Air Force. Many of our soldiers coming back have not seen the Air Force at work; they saw only the bombers that escaped its protective attack. They underrate its achievements. I have heard much talk of this; that is why I go out of my way to say this. I will tell you about it.' https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/transformingsociety/private-lives/yourcountry/collections/churchillexhibition/churchill-the-orator/fight-on-the-beaches/ Most of the facts and figures he went on to give are now known to be wrong, but he was correct on the whole. The Luftwaffe attempted to interdict the evacuation and failed. It was also the first time that the Germans encountered Spitfires (previously held in reserve), which they clearly did not like much. Churchill remarked, 'The great French Army was very largely, for the time being, cast back and disturbed by the onrush of a few thousands of armoured vehicles. May it not also be that the cause of civilisation itself will be defended by the skill and devotion of a few thousand airmen?' In the next few months, this proved prophetic, leading to his speech on 'The Few' on 20 August. Khamba Tendal (talk) 19:18, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg)
.svg)
