Jump to content

Talk:Battle of Berlin: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
PBS (talk | contribs)
Autopatrolled
116,854 edits
German numbers
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Battle of Berlin/Archive 10) (bot
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{talkheader}}
{{Skip to talk}}
{{Talk header}}
{{WikiProjectBanners
{{Article history
|1={{WPMILHIST
|action1=WPR
|old-peer-review=yes
|action1date=01:04, 27 July 2007
|class=B
|action1link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Peer review/Battle of Berlin
|German-task-force=yes
|action1result=reviewed
|Russian-task-force=yes
|action1oldid=147212362
|WWII-task-force=yes
}}
|2={{WikiProject Germany|class=B|importance=high}}
|3={{WikiProject Russian History|class=B|importance=mid}}
}}


|action2=WAR
{{archive box|auto=long}}
|action2date=03:22, 22 September 2008
==German numbers==
|action2link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Battle of Berlin
|action2result=approved
|action2oldid=239357652


|action3=FAC
From my talk page with my replies on [[User:Shipslong45|Shipslong45]] talk page. --[[User:Philip Baird Shearer|Philip Baird Shearer]] 17:27, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
|action3date=00:25, 11 October 2008
<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;">
|action3link=Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Battle of Berlin/archive1
Hello
|action3result=not promoted
|action3oldid=244398092


|currentstatus=FFAC
What are you doing in the battle of Berlin article
|otd1date=2005-05-02|otd1oldid=16335190

|otd2date=2006-05-02|otd2oldid=51212000
From your edits it looks like that 45,000 soldiers and 40,000 were ALONE fighting 2,5 million Soldiers and these 85,000 men were able to inflict some 280,000 casualties
|otd3date=2007-05-02|otd3oldid=127611131

|otd4date=2008-05-02|otd4oldid=209404894
If you look at all other languages they all say that the Axis had 1,000,000 men
|otd5date=2009-05-02|otd5oldid=287469370

|otd6date=2010-05-02|otd6oldid=359542992
So why do you say that the Axis only had 85,000? <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment was added by [[User:Shipslong45|Shipslong45]] ([[User talk:Shipslong45|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Shipslong45|contribs]]) 10:34, 17 August 2007 (UTC{{{3|}}})</small>
|otd7date=2015-05-02|otd7oldid=660036821

|otd8date=2016-05-02|otd8oldid=718036562

|otd9date=2017-05-02|otd9oldid=778399348
:If the number of Germans is known and sourced then please add a citation to a [[WP:V|Verifiable]], [[WP:RS|Reliable Source]], that states how many Germans were involved.
|otd10date=2019-05-02|otd10oldid=895190737

|otd11date=2020-05-02|otd11oldid=954091195
:The sentence I restored says: "'''In''' Berlin about 45,000 soldiers, supplemented by the ..." (my emphasis), also please read the footnote to the sentence that explains that "A large number of the 45,000 were troops of the LVI Panzer Corps that were at the start of the battle part of the German IX Army on the Seelow Heights". --[[User:Philip Baird Shearer|Philip Baird Shearer]] 10:48, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
|otd12date=2022-05-02|otd12oldid=1085817989
This internet LEARNING home page also says 1 million
}}

{{WikiProject banner shell|class=A|vital=yes|1=
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/battle_for_berlin.htm
{{WikiProject Military history |class=A |A-Class=pass |German=y |Russian=y |WWII=y}}

{{WikiProject Germany |importance=Top |Prussia=yes}}

{{WikiProject Soviet Union |importance=Top}}
So I will add the 1 million again ok? [[User:Shipslong45|Shipslong45]] 10:47, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
{{WikiProject Russia |importance=Top |hist=y |mil=y}}

}}

{{User:MiszaBot/config
HUH?
|archiveheader = {{aan}}
|maxarchivesize = 150K
|counter = 10
|minthreadsleft = 4
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
|algo = old(90d)
|archive = Talk:Battle of Berlin/Archive %(counter)d
}}
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
|target=/Archive index
|mask=/Archive <#>
|leading_zeros=0
|indexhere=yes}}
{{Archives |bot=Lowercase sigmabot III |age=3 |units=months |search=yes|index=/Archive index}}


== Semi-protected edit request on 5 November 2023 ==
Just go here and look


{{Edit semi-protected|Battle of Berlin|answered=yes}}
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/battle_for_berlin.htm
Please remove "RAF" per [[WP:HATEXTRA]]. [[Special:Contributions/49.150.4.134|49.150.4.134]] ([[User talk:49.150.4.134|talk]]) 00:25, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
:{{done}}<!-- Template:ESp --> Thank you. [[User:Liu1126|Liu1126]] ([[User talk:Liu1126|talk]]) 14:26, 5 November 2023 (UTC)


== Should Hitler be included as a commander/leader? ==
:The source provided is not good enough because there is no information about how the figures are arrived at and it does not cite its sources, and it is not published in a peer review journal or by a person who is an acknowledged expert historian of this period. For example do the figures include the German Twelfth and Twenty-First Armies which were initially facing the Western Allies, or is it only counting the figures for the formations on the Oder-Neisse front, Does it include all of the German [[Army Group Centre]] even those that did not take part in the Battle? --[[User:Philip Baird Shearer|Philip Baird Shearer]] 11:04, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


Honestly, I think he should be included as a leader, but I want the input of other people first. [[User:WIKIPEDA (yes i meant to misspell it)|WIKIPEDA (yes i meant to misspell it)]] ([[User talk:WIKIPEDA (yes i meant to misspell it)|talk]]) 05:49, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
This is very Verifiable and Reliable since it is an official site sanctioned by the United Kingdom to educate its citizens, it does not get more reliable then that [[User:Shipslong45|Shipslong45]] 10:51, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


:I would agree. He was a the leader of the Third Reich and thus the head of the armed forces. [[User:Jmurphy042000|Jmurphy042000]] ([[User talk:Jmurphy042000|talk]]) 00:40, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
:As to your last edit you still have not [[WP:CITE|cited]] your source. --[[User:Philip Baird Shearer|Philip Baird Shearer]] 11:06, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


== Semi-protected edit request on 21 March 2024 ==


{{Edit semi-protected|Battle of Berlin|answered=yes}}
The 1 million was the figure initially given in Soviet estimates. In other words, 1 million defenders is what the USSR prepared for in their plans. However, due to the depleted nature of the divisions facing them, the actual strength was probably somewhat less. My gut feeling says ~700,000, which would account for the difficulties encountered in the campaign, as well as the high body count and the numbers of prisoners taken. The German strength total couldn't have been much less than 600,000, in my estimation. Combining the five field armies, plus Op Group Steiner, plus Volkssturm, plus police units you have something at least on the order of 50-60 divisions. Given that German divisions tended to be on the large side, if you treated those 50-60 divisions as full strength you would very well end up with a figure close to 1 million. Allowing for some depletion but retaining combat effectiveness, a more realistic total would be somewhat less, but not significantly less. There's no way to go here except by estimating, since Germany didn't have an accounting system in 1945, and what they did have was already breaking down in 44.
spell correction of defence plan to defense plan [[Special:Contributions/2600:1700:E60:2310:55B7:F1E8:FF3C:B1F|2600:1700:E60:2310:55B7:F1E8:FF3C:B1F]] ([[User talk:2600:1700:E60:2310:55B7:F1E8:FF3C:B1F|talk]]) 06:00, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
:Are you not a native English user? Only in [[American English]] is defence spelled as "defense". See: [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/defence the relevant Wiktionary entry]. [[User:Dimadick|Dimadick]] ([[User talk:Dimadick|talk]]) 06:12, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
:[[File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done:'''<!-- Template:ESp --> please see [[MOS:ENGVAR]]. [[User:M.Bitton|M.Bitton]] ([[User talk:M.Bitton|talk]]) 16:36, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
::shouldn't the proper language reflect the proper grammar? If the person is reading it in English, in America, shouldn't the article reflect that translation? As an American we can be thrown off by English spellings and vice versa,so shouldn't each page translation reflect the correct spelling? Even if that is two variations of one language, as they are not the same? [[User:Jmurphy042000|Jmurphy042000]] ([[User talk:Jmurphy042000|talk]]) 04:19, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
:::The default for international organisations is British English. For example, Americans working for NATO have to use British English. Doesn’t cause these organisations any problems [[Special:Contributions/86.3.134.204|86.3.134.204]] ([[User talk:86.3.134.204|talk]]) 06:27, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
::::I understand, however, that wasn't what I stated. I stated that the correct grammar should be reflected in the language they are viewing. As an American, who knows many Americans not framiliar with British English, it does cause problems. You're speaking of a world wide organization. That's like saying all scientists understand latin. Why? To stop the confusion you mentioned. However this is a different circumstance, is it not? If I am in American, reading American English I would expect to see that vocabulary used. Tyres in the UK is Tires in America. There are differences. Another example would be the slang term "boot". It is 2 vastly different things in America versus the UK. [[User:Jmurphy042000|Jmurphy042000]] ([[User talk:Jmurphy042000|talk]]) 00:44, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
:::::Also, Wikipedia is technically an American organization, not an international organization. Just because it is on the Web doesn't mean it is "international". It is technically an American non-profit. Which would mean the default language is... American English. [[User:Jmurphy042000|Jmurphy042000]] ([[User talk:Jmurphy042000|talk]]) 00:47, 17 May 2024 (UTC)


== Semi-protected edit request on 2 July 2024 ==
Unfortunately, the only figures that hint at an accurate total either this immediate postwar Soviet estimate of casualties I found (~937,000 killed/captured out of the expected 1,000,000), which is more of historigraphic rather than historical interest, or slanted pro-German accounts that seek to minimize any and all German engagement in this campaign out of some perverse sense of national honor (and I'm not bashing Ziemke, just idiots like Albert Seaton). It's true that the total Berlin garrison numbered 80,000-100,000, but if one wants to confine the operational area to the city itself, Soviet troop strengths would have to be revised to 350,000 for the seven armies that participated in the assault itself.


{{edit semi-protected|Battle of Berlin|answered=yes}}
That said, there has to be some way of putting up reasonable estimates, but all the sources I have read either use the 1,000,000 figure (probably more accurate but not good enough for reasons stated above) or play the transparently disingenuous lowballing game that assumes the reader has no grasp of basic arithmetic. When/IF I find a sourced statistic that seems reasonable, I'll try to put it up. Until then, would it be all right to qualify the 1,000,000 figure as an initial estimate? <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment was added by [[Special:Contributions/{{{IP|{{{User|68.160.55.123}}}}}}|{{{IP|{{{User|68.160.55.123}}}}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{IP|{{{User|68.160.55.123}}}}}}|talk]]) {{{Time|15:07:42, August 19, 2007 (UTC)}}}</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
Someone changed the Nazi flag next to Hitler’s name to the flag of Israel. [[Special:Contributions/23.251.211.70|23.251.211.70]] ([[User talk:23.251.211.70|talk]]) 23:12, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
----
:{{done}}<!-- Template:ESp --> Fixed, thanks. [[User:Geardona|Geardona]] ([[User talk:Geardona|talk to me?]]) 23:40, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
</div>

Latest revision as of 18:11, 3 July 2024

Former featured article candidateBattle of Berlin is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 27, 2007WikiProject peer reviewReviewed
September 22, 2008WikiProject A-class reviewApproved
October 11, 2008Featured article candidateNot promoted
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on May 2, 2005, May 2, 2006, May 2, 2007, May 2, 2008, May 2, 2009, May 2, 2010, May 2, 2015, May 2, 2016, May 2, 2017, May 2, 2019, May 2, 2020, and May 2, 2022.
Current status: Former featured article candidate

Semi-protected edit request on 5 November 2023

[edit]

Please remove "RAF" per WP:HATEXTRA. 49.150.4.134 (talk) 00:25, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Thank you. Liu1126 (talk) 14:26, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Should Hitler be included as a commander/leader?

[edit]

Honestly, I think he should be included as a leader, but I want the input of other people first. WIKIPEDA (yes i meant to misspell it) (talk) 05:49, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree. He was a the leader of the Third Reich and thus the head of the armed forces. Jmurphy042000 (talk) 00:40, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 21 March 2024

[edit]

spell correction of defence plan to defense plan 2600:1700:E60:2310:55B7:F1E8:FF3C:B1F (talk) 06:00, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are you not a native English user? Only in American English is defence spelled as "defense". See: the relevant Wiktionary entry. Dimadick (talk) 06:12, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done: please see MOS:ENGVAR. M.Bitton (talk) 16:36, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
shouldn't the proper language reflect the proper grammar? If the person is reading it in English, in America, shouldn't the article reflect that translation? As an American we can be thrown off by English spellings and vice versa,so shouldn't each page translation reflect the correct spelling? Even if that is two variations of one language, as they are not the same? Jmurphy042000 (talk) 04:19, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The default for international organisations is British English. For example, Americans working for NATO have to use British English. Doesn’t cause these organisations any problems 86.3.134.204 (talk) 06:27, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand, however, that wasn't what I stated. I stated that the correct grammar should be reflected in the language they are viewing. As an American, who knows many Americans not framiliar with British English, it does cause problems. You're speaking of a world wide organization. That's like saying all scientists understand latin. Why? To stop the confusion you mentioned. However this is a different circumstance, is it not? If I am in American, reading American English I would expect to see that vocabulary used. Tyres in the UK is Tires in America. There are differences. Another example would be the slang term "boot". It is 2 vastly different things in America versus the UK. Jmurphy042000 (talk) 00:44, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, Wikipedia is technically an American organization, not an international organization. Just because it is on the Web doesn't mean it is "international". It is technically an American non-profit. Which would mean the default language is... American English. Jmurphy042000 (talk) 00:47, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 2 July 2024

[edit]

Someone changed the Nazi flag next to Hitler’s name to the flag of Israel. 23.251.211.70 (talk) 23:12, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Fixed, thanks. Geardona (talk to me?) 23:40, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Battle_of_Berlin&oldid=1232431792"