Was the Schlieffen Plan a true failure?

I am sorry to report that the writing in this essay is poor. No dubt the writer did put a good deal of effort into this product, and I realize that writers -- myself included -- tend to be very sensitive about criticism, so let me take just the opening sentences:

"The Schlieffen Plan was known as a failure in World War 1 history due to its disability of defeating France in six weeks and deadlocks were created afterwards."

This is the only source I have ever seen which uses the Arabic numeral "1" rather than the Roman numeral "I." This is a case in which failure to follow the normal conventions needs some justification. Why does the writer here use "was"? The debate is still going on, in contemporary circles. The writer uses "disability." I believe he was trying for the word "inability." More properly, he should have used "failure." historians who have studied Schlieffin's plan says it was a fine plan. The failure was in the execuiton. "Deadlocks were created." I would point to this as a prime example of passive voice. Who created these deadlocks? Also, were the deadlocks a matter of creation or occurrence?



"This plan was named after its creator, Cout Alfred Von Schlieffen (1833-191) who was the former chief of the German general staff."


Schlieffen was a count, not a cout. I do not believe his life ran backwards for 1643 years. When he drafted the plan and had it adopted as the controlling plan for any impending war, Count von Schlieffen was the chief of staff, not the former cheif of staff.


"The main aims of this plan were to defeat France in six weeks, in order to avoid fight France and Russia on two fronts."


Again, this is weak passive voice. "In order to avoid fight France and Russia on two fronts": while this is not as bad as it might be, it needs polishing.



"However, after German was defeated in 1914 at the First Battle of Marne, the Schlieffen was failed."


I presume the writer means "after Germany was defeated," and the battle is described as the First Battle of the Marne. While the article is a small word, it is important. "the Schlieffen was failed." Again, it is passive vooice, a word is missing, and the verb form is incorrect.


I could continue at too great a length. Facts are stated incorrectly; the thesis is not developed; the language is painful.


I did not rank this essay "poor" becasue I am a stick-in-the-mud. I ranked it "poor" because, sadly, it is.