Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:30, 26 March 2010

Archive 1 Jan 2007 - Feb 2008
Archive 2 Feb 2008 - Dec 2009

Type 63

I have whacked the page under WP:CSD G12. You can now recreate a stub at your leisure. Please alert me of any similar copyvios you notice - we need to be careful about this. Thanks and Happy New Year! Buckshot06 (talk) 09:27, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

nope

"official soviet surces" arent reliable, they "update" their numbers with every book. this sources arent reliable, and iam sure thats a fact on wiki, so there is no need to include them in the article. iam no censor, i only deleted fantasy numbers from an article Blablaaa (talk) 06:32, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

changed your edit. its not even the correct place for this sci fi figures, u can discuss in the article and no in a "ref" because the ref their doesnt support the figures above... Blablaaa (talk) 06:40, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

what did u not understand? that this source is not a relaible source or that your "footnote" is at the wrong place because its a ref for other numbers. what did u miss? , i will change again because u ref numbers with a sentence which contradicts this refs. thats simply wrong. put it somewhere else but not behind this numbers. this number are krivosheev and your number contradic this. please try to understand what i explained now to u, even when my english is terrible Blablaaa (talk) 07:29, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi Mr Wilson, I've reverted Blablaaa's edits. Please provide the date of the GErman translation of the Soviet official history and if possible, the date of the original publishing of the Soviet official history. Buckshot06 (talk) 07:47, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

blödsinn.... das hat nix damit zu tun wie ich die sache sehe sondern das sie sinnlose schwachsinn sind, deswegen scherrt sich niemand um russische daten über deutsche verluste, weil das simple kriegsschätzungen sind, verstehst du das nicht ? niemand sieht diese daten als reliable an deswegen benutzt man sie einfach nicht. diese schrott bücher sollten ignoriert werden sie verdienen es gar nicht gelesen zu werden Blablaaa (talk) 07:49, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

maybe u should go to all eastern front articles and add what u find in these books than the german lost 1000000 tanks and 200000000 men. very good value for the readerBlablaaa (talk) 07:56, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Inclusion of sourced material is always better than exclusion of sourced material. W. B. Wilson (talk) 19:01, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

hmmm

"During the course of the battle, the Soviets advanced some 100 miles (160 kilometers) northward and seized the key transportation hub of Debrecen. When viewed purely in terms of ground lost or gained, the Battle of Debrecen was a Soviet victory. The German counter-attack at Nyíregyháza allowed an orderly withdrawal of Axis forces in the area, the formation of a solid front line, and the prevention of a Soviet eruption into the rear areas of Army Group Wöhler. Thus, while the Soviets advanced, their goal of cutting off Group Wöhler was frustrated. The casualty rates of both sides were of a similar order of magnitude, also indicating there was no clear victor in the battle."

are this your findings, where is this from ???? Blablaaa (talk) 08:06, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Please note that I've blocked Blablaaa (talk · contribs) for one week. Nick-D (talk) 10:12, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Frieser

Thanks. Dapi89 (talk) 14:18, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Gerald Reitlinger

Thanks for drawing this article to my attention. I haven't got any resources on him. I haven't written much biographical stuff apart from people like Giotto and Leonardo and so on. Thee's probably somone out there who knows more about this person and could help you. Cheers! Amandajm (talk) 10:36, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

René Prioux

Excellent! Dapi89 (talk) 19:32, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I will. Dapi89 (talk) 22:51, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

XVI Army Corps (Germany)

Excellent! Thanks for doing all these sub-articles, they help. Dapi89 (talk) 22:51, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Army

Hello,

sadly i cannot add much more than you know, basically the italian squad was similar to NATO standard, generally there was a MG42/59 and sometimes an AT weapon, but effectively, there was not that much. As for the infantry squad and whetever, it would take a bit of time, i posted some stuff in wikibooks, but it would be better if i'll check this issue in the database, maybe there is the possibility to find out more detailed ORBAT in the infantry and so on. --Stefanomencarelli (talk) 22:35, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Courtesy note

You are receiving this note because you participated in this TFD. Some of these have been re-nominated here, where you may wish to comment. Thanks, –xeno 14:30, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Military history France during World War II

Sure! I'd be willing to help. The best time for me would be in May after my current semester finishes.UBER 17:37, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

re: "Controversies" articles

Nick-D (talk) 09:51, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Your note to communicat

Thanks your long note. Will study and respond in due course. Communicat (talk) 14:51, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

It seems to me what you're suggesting is the equivalent of trying to prove that water boils. It's an exercise in futility, because the fact that water boils is so completely self-evident. Same applies to the controversial nature of some key Western Allied command decisions. It's obvious that the decisions were controversial and NPOV doesn't come into it. The head of the British Army and other very senior officers are quoted and sourced, and so too are the head of the Red Army and Stalin, which is sufficient to counter any NPOV charges.

Besides, a full post-mortem analysis of the Western Front is perhaps best suited to the main WW2 page or even better, because of length restrictions, a separate article page of its own. In any event, a proper post-mortem would be difficult if not impossible because many key Western documents remain classified under a 75-year embargo.

Re your contention that "the inability of the Allies to push into Germany in late 1944 (they tried that with numerous offensives but all ground down primarily because of logistical and manpower issues.)" To that I say: Simply because it is the dominant Western narrative does not necessarily make it true. The Western Allied offensive was essentially an air offensive, the so-called "strategic" bombing campaign, which Churchill and others thought would "win the war". It did not. It actually boosted German morale and helped prolong the war, due to strategic bungling and controversial command decisions. 41.31.239.139 (talk) 14:38, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I saw your earlier question to Nick-D. Indeed, due process is to run them through an AfD debate, and thus get the wider community's input. I agree that's your right next move. Personally, I agree that 'Controversial command decisions' lumps a whole lot of little-related material together and in doing so does not present it in the proper context. Central-Eastern Europe's first definition section is a good clarification/disambig article, which ought to be kept if possible; all the historical rambling underneath belongs each at separate articles. World War II itself is the article that ought to link all of these together. Actually you might consider first trying to delete all the non-definitional material out of Central-Eastern Europe, and if that is resisted, take it to an AfD. Buckshot06 (talk) 19:29, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

René Prioux

Hi,

sorry for the belated answer. Actually, I don't think Prioux was politically active after that, at least not in any kind of high-profile politics. I'll try to look for any new info on him, but I'm not that familiar about his career. I'll let you know if I find anything worthwile. cheers, Jean-Jacques Georges (talk) 18:40, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

For a specialized online bookstore, this one might be interesting. You might find some interesting books on military history here (all in French, alas. Jean-Jacques Georges (talk) 19:08, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

For used books, you might try here, they often have a good choice of military history books, I found a great deal of stuff there. Just check that the individual sellers do international shippings. Jean-Jacques Georges (talk) 19:11, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

You may also try this one. Jean-Jacques Georges (talk) 20:34, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Controversial command decisions, World War II

An article that you have been involved in editing, Controversial command decisions, World War II, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Controversial command decisions, World War II. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Nick-D (talk) 22:30, 26 March 2010 (UTC)