Edward J. Erickson's book is an extremely important one that looks at the Gallipoli campaign from the Turkish point of view, something few western historians have done. He uses the Turkish official history, which is three volumes in length, as well as memoirs and other published accounts (in Turkish) from Turkish officers. Since 1916 we have heard largely a one sided version of the battle from the British/ANZAC/French point of view, with a little from some German officers. The book details how and why the Ottoman Army beat the British, ANZAC, and French forces during the battle, from the naval bombardment to the final evacuation. Erickson frequently stops to discuss western views of certain aspects of the battle, then contrasts them to what the Turkish were doing, which gives us a much better understanding of events.
Erickson believes that the Turks out performed the British and others because they had superior reporting systems that allowed Turkish officers to know what was going on, a better planning systems to put that knowledge to use, aggressive officers who led from the front usually without German assistance to implement those plans, a more flexible force structure, and their corps and army level headquarters functioned better than their opponents. Since this is an operational history, it does not include much from the soldiers' point of view. It is well supported by maps reprinted from the Turkish official history. He also includes a chapter that discusses Ottoman logistics.
This book is essential if one wants to understand what happened at Gallipoli and why. I recommend it for anyone interested in World War I, the Gallipoli campaign, as well as nearly any library.
All I can say is that I'd like to see more such books from Erickson or others dicusssing the Turkish point of view in other theaters such as Palestine, Mesopotamia or the Caucasus.