Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

Couple of suggestions with regards to this write-up (with a view to avoiding over-generalizations while also not being too neutering):

(1) Replace "The Palestinian Jews [...]" with "A number of Jews, both long-established locals and recent immigrants from Europe, [...]". A lot of the "Palestinian" (that is, Sephardic/Arabic) Jews were neither Zionists nor particularly pro-British (then again, few Arabs of any religion were at the time), and a fair few of the Ashkenazi immigrants from Europe had rather anti-British views as well (although as they were Zionists it was for a different reason than the Arab population).

(2) Replace "The Palestinian Muslims" with "Many Palestinian Arabs", as Palestine contained substantial Arab Christian and Jewish populations at the time. I would also substitute "were siding with the Germans" with "took a pro-German position." and then delete the rest of the paragraph and replace it with the following:

"The Palestinian position was influenced by their nascent nationalism and its accompanying resentment of British colonial rule, their reflexive and often knee-jerk anti-immigrant sentiment, common enough to other national and ethnic groups at the time, with regards to the recent influx of European Jews, and in some cases, such as with the Grand Mufti Hajj Amin al Husseini, anti-Jewish animosity of the sort that had emerged in Europe over the previous half-century (and had led to the increased migration of Jews to Palestine in the first place)."

quote:

ORIGINAL: capitan

Nice! Thank you, it is not exactly my speciality and it is a minefield to find the right wording. I did as per Steves suggestion remove knee-jerk. Any other changes needed? Lets make it right! 

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Capitan

A big thanks for posting my first two write ups so quickly. My next write up will be XXX Corps which, given its extensive WWII combat history will give me far more to write about - what a great Unit!. Before I get carried completely carried away, is there a maximum length for these write ups?

Rgds

Warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Capitan

A big thanks for posting my first two write ups so quickly.  My next write up will be XXX Corps which, given its extensive WWII combat history will give me far more to write about - what a great Unit!.  Before I get carried completely carried away, is there a maximum length for these write ups?     

Rgds

Warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
I think of the write-ups as 'teases', to induce people to find books and read more about the units that fought in the war.

quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian
Mentioning British 'Territorial' divisions quickly leads a reader to wonder how they relate to WiF 'Territorial' units. I've never known what the 'Territorial' designation means... ?

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

I am doing the write ups for the remaining UK Land forces and have hit a slight problem.  One of the counters is the 3rd Cavalry Division....which didn`t exist in WWII.  I presume other countries counters have some similar anomolies?  If so - and to be consistent - how have they been written up?

I could either go down something like the - "this unit did not exist in WWII as the advent of the tank in WWI, began rendering traditional cavalry units obsolete" route or try and give possible unit types that this counter could represent.  I prefer the former as the write ups are supposed to be historical but want to ensure consistency.