Jump to content

Talk:George S. Patton: 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
→Image: Reply
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Reply
 
(42 intermediate revisions by 20 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav|noredlinks=y}}
|maxarchivesize = 100K
|counter = 4
|minthreadsleft = 4
|algo = old(90d)
|archive = Talk:George S. Patton/Archive %(counter)d
}}
{{Talk header|noarchive=}}
{{Vital article|level=5|topic=People|subpage=Military leaders|class=FA}}
{{ArticleHistory
{{ArticleHistory
|maindate= 11 November 2016
|maindate= 11 November 2016
Line 21: Line 12:
|action2result=approved
|action2result=approved
|action2oldid=541622782
|action2oldid=541622782

|action3=FAC
|action3=FAC
|action3date=10:02, 08 September 2013
|action3date=10:02, 08 September 2013
Line 31: Line 21:
|otd2date=2019-11-11|otd2oldid=925684902
|otd2date=2019-11-11|otd2oldid=925684902
}}
}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=FA|vital=yes|living=n|listas=Patton, George S.|1=
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
{{WikiProject Biography|living=n|class=FA|listas=Patton, George S.|military-work-group=y|military-priority=Top}}
{{WikiProject Biography|military-work-group=y|military-priority=Top}}
{{WikiProject Military history|class=FA|A-Class=pass|B1=yes|B2=yes|B3=yes|B4=yes|B5=yes|Biography=y|US=y|WWI=y|WWII=y}}
{{WikiProject Military history|class=FA|A-Class=pass|B1=yes|B2=yes|B3=yes|B4=yes|B5=yes|Biography=y|US=y|WWI=y|WWII=y|Land-vehicles-task-force=y}}
{{WikiProject Homeschooling|class=FA|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Homeschooling|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject California|class=FA|importance=mid|southerncalifornia=yes}}
{{WikiProject California|importance=Mid|southerncalifornia=yes}}
{{WikiProject Olympics|class=FA|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Olympics|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Pritzker-GLAM|class=FA|importance=mid}}
{{WikiProject Pritzker-GLAM|importance=mid}}
}}
}}
{{American English}}
{{American English}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
{{archives |auto=long |search=yes |bot=MiszaBot I |age=3 |units=months|index=/Archive index}}
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav|noredlinks=y}}
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
|maxarchivesize = 100K
|target=/Archive index
|counter = 4
|mask=/Archive <#>
|minthreadsleft = 4
|leading_zeros=0
|algo = old(90d)
|indexhere=yes}}
|archive = Talk:George S. Patton/Archive %(counter)d
__FORCETOC__<!----here temporarily to link to an investigation---->
}}

== What is in a name? ==

Would someone please add something that explains why the General is known as George S. Patton "Junior", when his grandfather is denoted as George S. Patton I and his father is listed as George S. Patton II? I cannot reconcile this anomaly, especially when Patton names his son George S. Patton IV. Perhaps I missed this, but it is not in the Early Life section, where the Patton lineage is discussed in length. [[User:MissMaryMack14|MissMaryMack14]] ([[User talk:MissMaryMack14|talk]]) 21:44, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

== Can an admin strike through my edits because I don't want anyone to learn anything from my edits? ==

After editing this article, I seem to have been reverted by some very, very clever people who are so clever they don't think anyone else needs to know any more information about Patton's death. Using such a clever argument about my grammar (ho ho if only you knew who I was really was) - and of course I am being polite - because it's so so important to be polite to these individuals who sign up to do free work on this site for those little badges. That what they have written is preserved.

I therefore demand that my edits are struck through by an admin so no one else can know and thus learn anything from what I wrote. I don't want others to know the location of Patton's crash, the name of the street it happened on, and other historical details. Can this be done? I mean luckily there are so many other professionally written web articles (hence where I got my own info from) others can start from scratch and do their own research. Hence I don't want my edits to be a help to anyone on here so I want my edits struck through and kept from public view.[[Special:Contributions/146.90.208.242|146.90.208.242]] ([[User talk:146.90.208.242|talk]]) 21:45, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
:Typically, if content has been added in good faith, it doesn't violate the copyrights of someone else's work, the content is appropriate for the article and supported by reliable sourcing, then demanding it be removed out of spite is not really a sufficiecnt reason. Once you contribute content to Wikipedia, it's not really yours anymore, (you'll find more info on that [[WP:OWN|here]] and [[WP:COPY|here]]). If your experience here has left you with a bad taste, it's probably best to just walk away. I'm not suggesting you leave Wikipedia completely, but instead perhaps consider working on a different arricle. (jmho) - [[User talk:Thewolfchild|<span style="color:black">w<span style="color: red;">o</span>lf</span>]] 03:44, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
::Unless the poster has violated Wiki policy, inviting him to stop working non an article smacks of censorship? [[User:Jokem|Jokem]] ([[User talk:Jokem|talk]]) 06:00, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
:::Suggesting they take a break from an article that is leading to such ill-will that they are demanding content be censored out spite is just that... a suggestion. And you somehow think it's a bad one? - [[User talk:Thewolfchild|<span style="color:black">w<span style="color: red;">o</span>lf</span>]] 06:46, 18 July 2023 (UTC)


: OP, since you made this request on 2 July, an unknowable number of editors could have looked back through the history and identified exactly what you have contributed. Then, in case your request is ever acted on, they could have strategically kept a record of your edits, and then, once they've been expunged from the article's history and the article proper, they could just add them back in under their own editorships. So the info is not going to be lost no matter what happens. Best to just walk away. -- [[User:JackofOz|<span style="font-family: Papyrus;">Jack of Oz</span>]] [[User talk:JackofOz#top|<span style="font-size:85%; font-family: Verdana;"><sup>[pleasantries]</sup></span>]] 09:20, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
== Extensive use of Axelrod ==
:you are spot on - it is very interesting that the death circumstances are absolute - even the mention of assassination is not tolerated in the article or the front talk page it seems - going to the archives shows that in the past was some discussion about it - even sweden aka hidden hand / esse non videri / nobel / mordor - is mentioned in the archives .. but well .. something is very fishy - wikipedia imho part of the rug that is pulled .. tolkien's books are also interesting in this respect .. just leaving bread crumbs .. [[User:Ebricca|Ebricca]] ([[User talk:Ebricca|talk]]) 19:47, 15 June 2024 (UTC)


== Edit warring IP ==
I have noticed an extensive use of Axelrod for referencing some sections, which are grossly incorrect. I may have a looking I get a chance, but if someone has more correct references and can adjust, that works too. [[User:Enderwigginau|Enderwigginau]] ([[User talk:Enderwigginau|talk]]) 02:26, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
::I found 8 reviews of Axelrod's biography --all are quite favorable. EG: "''The ability of the book to succinctly depict Patton is a tribute to Axelrod’s skills as a writer and historian. Three attributes especially stand out throughout the book. First, Axelrod has mastery over his subject material. This is his second book on Patton, following Patton on Leadership (2001), and he truly capitalizes on past research. Second, the author belongs to a select group of writers, who can crisply and quickly come to their points. There is no added “fluff” in Axelrod’s writing style. Finally, Axelrod has done a superb job of selecting key events in Patton’s life that give readers a balanced look at the man. The author reflects on incidents that exposed both the good and not so admired qualities of Patton. Combined these factors give readers a true understanding of the man in minimal terms." '' [''History: Reviews of New Books'' Jan. 2006] KIRKUS REVIEW (a journal for librarians who buy selected books) said, "Like Patton at his best: [this book is] polished, precise and persuasive." [[User:Rjensen|Rjensen]] ([[User talk:Rjensen|talk]]) 02:54, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
:::It’s not a competition to find positive reviews, research any specific point that Axelrod makes and you can find errors. He is very good at generalised information, but not specifics. And he isn’t the only reference used in this article that is wanting. Note the section on II Corps after Kasserine Pass and it states that Patton rebuilt and retrained them, and then had Bradley made his deputy. This is patently false as Bradley was sent to fix II Corps by Eisenhower, and did so before Patton was made commander. Patton then requested Bradley which was allowed provided that Bradley still worked for Ike. [[User:Enderwigginau|Enderwigginau]] ([[User talk:Enderwigginau|talk]]) 11:42, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
:::I also made a recommendation under "Phantom Army" to correct historical inaccuracies attributed to Axelrod. For example: "The German High Command had more respect for Patton than for any other Allied commander and considered him to be central to any plan to invade Europe from England. Because of this, Patton was made a prominent figure in the deception scheme Operation Fortitude during the first half of 1944."
:::While I don't know Axelrod's source for such a claim (or if he actually wrote something so egregiously nonfactual; I would hope not, but I don't have that book to check precisely what was written) my initial guess is that this claim is based on General George C. Marshall's 21 October 1943 letter to Eisenhower. "It seems evident to us that Patton’s movements are of great importance to German reactions and therefore should be carefully considered. I had thought and spoke to [Walter Bedell] Smith about Patton being given a trip to Cairo and Cyprus but the Corsican visit appeals to me as carrying much more of a threat [to northern Italy]."
:::Something that "seems evident" does not constitute a factual claim. There is no evidence that Marshall had knowledge of the inner communications within the Oberkommando. He was simply making a guess. Conjecture based on guesswork should not stated here as historical fact.
:::German records do not contain evidence the Oberkommando knew who Patton was besides one of America's many generals. There is no evidence they viewed him as a strategist of note, nor "had more respect for Patton than for any other Allied commander" at any point in the war.
:::As it seems that others have found historical inaccuracies in Axelrod's work, I propose diversifying more with biographies that rely on stronger documented evidence, or that the current wording be clarified to remove known historical inaccuracies. My own research is in part based on Harry Yeide's "Fighting Patton: George S. Patton Jr. Through the Eyes of His Enemies." [[User:Tbonequeen79|Tbonequeen79]] ([[User talk:Tbonequeen79|talk]]) 12:40, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
:I think that citing any good secondary RS is OK here because they provide proper context. However, I would avoid direct citation of Patton himself, unless it was made by a secondary source. [[User:My very best wishes|My very best wishes]] ([[User talk:My very best wishes|talk]]) 18:37, 17 November 2022 (UTC)


To the dynamic IP(s) reverting back and forth on the infobox img, please read [[WP:SLOWEW]]. I'm not too bothered by which of the two images are used, but this slow edit war has been going on for several months now, so either make a legitimate case on TP, or stop. [[User:Loafiewa|Loafiewa]] ([[User talk:Loafiewa|talk]]) 15:00, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
== Antisemitic Views ==


== Tanks ==
It is not clear to me in this section whether he was talking about Jews as a race, or just the fact that the Jews were treated worse than others, and thus were in even poorer condition. [[User:Jokem|Jokem]] ([[User talk:Jokem|talk]]) 07:52, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
*Really? This quote clearly shows that General Patton considered the Jews subhuman like the Nazis did, the only thing he disagreed with was the mass genocide of the Jews. In other quotes, he complains about the "semitic and communist influence in the American mainstream media" which "criticizes him and German society". There is also his pre-coldwar quote about Russians as "Asians = barbarians who doesn't value human life." Patton was a psychopath (judging by his treatment of a wounded American soldier whom he beat and wanted to shoot) and an ordinary ideological fascist of the time. But at the same time he was most talented american general of WW2. History is not always "good guys" vs "bad guys" like it on Hollywod, you see. [[User:TyronMcLannister|TyronMcLannister]] ([[User talk:TyronMcLannister|talk]]) 12:40, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
*:Yes, Really. Calling him a psychopath is POV. He had a temper and did not tolerate cowardice, this does not rise to the level of mental illness. [[User:Jokem|Jokem]] ([[User talk:Jokem|talk]]) 12:53, 2 May 2022 (UTC)


Arguably one of the most famous things about George S Patton are the tanks named after him.
::That was not so much about Jews as about all [[displaced persons]] found in German camps [https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/12/trump-general-patton-admiration-214545/]. That was bad. [[User:My very best wishes|My very best wishes]] ([[User talk:My very best wishes|talk]]) 23:27, 16 November 2022 (UTC)


These are the M46 Patton, M47 Patton, and M48 Patton. There is also an M60, which is almost identical to the M48, though I'm not sure if the M60 has 'Patton' in its name.
@{{user|Thewolfchild}} I am here. All literature on this subject, time period and particular quote (and dozens of others made by Patton specifically about DP Jews) make no debate on who he was referring to when he wrote these words in his diary. Taken out of context without proper sourcing and follow-up leaves the uninformed reader with the personal subjective to define "they" as they would wish to interpret. The NYTimes article does not even remotely refer to this quote (or anything else in the article) to "all" DPs but specifically and only "Jewish DPs". As does this article: [https://www.dispatch.com/story/opinion/cartoons/2014/10/01/richard-cohen-commentary-patton-book/23419489007/] Richard Cohen: "If they (the Jewish DP) ...", and this: [https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/george-patton] Jewish Library - Eisenhower quote specifically about the Jewish DPs: "we appear to be treating the Jews as the Nazis treated them except that we do not exterminate them ... One is led to wonder whether the German people, seeing this, are not supposing that we are following or at least condoning Nazi policy." The “military guard” for these Jewish DPs was Patton’s idea. [https://spartacus-educational.com/2WWpatton.htm] Spartacus Educational: "George Patton received a report written by Earl G. Harrison about the way the Jews in Germany were being treated by the US Army after the war. Patton wrote about the report in his diary on 15th September, 1945" (the very quote in question) [https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/12/trump-general-patton-admiration-214545/ Politico]: "The orders from above—Eisenhower wanted him to confiscate the houses of wealthy Germans so Jewish survivors could live in them—embittered Patton." Patton wrote: “the displaced sons-of-bitches in the various camps are blooming like green trees,” he wrote a friend. He saw journalists’ criticism of his handling of the Jews and the return of Nazis to high official positions as a result of Jewish and Communist plots. While Eisenhower ordered him to stop “mollycoddling Nazis". Patton remarked that the camps had been clean and decent before the arrival of the Jewish “DPs” (displaced persons), who were “pissing and crapping all over the place.” Eisenhower told Patton to shut up, but he continued his diatribe, telling Eisenhower he planned to make a nearby German village “a concentration camp for some of these goddam Jews.”


Also the M48 is my favourite tank, due to it being the main US MBT during the Vietnam war. It was also very versatile, being equipped with a 90mm M41 cannon, and later a 105mm cannon. [[Special:Contributions/92.238.62.76|92.238.62.76]] ([[User talk:92.238.62.76|talk]]) 17:42, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
Please provide sources that back the claim of the editors in questions who have stated only person opinions about the term "displaced persons" as being "all" in regards to this particular quote. History surrounding the impetus for Patton writing in his diary proves why he wrote the words and to whom he was referring. No source shows Patton referring to any other DP during this time with the same terminology or language as he does when he speaks of the Jewish DPs in letters, diaries and recorded personal conversations. In fact, he glorifies the Nazi prisoners and heralds them as heroes. All historical and expert sources confirm that Patton was clearly referring to Jewish DP. If the quote needs to be accompanied by further sources or addition content to better the understanding for readers, then this can be accomplished. But until an editor can provide reliable and clear sources equal in number that state Patton was not referring to Jewish DPs to those that back the claim that he was in this quote, then it must remain in the section.


== Image ==
The above discussion was / is highly subjective and personal in opinion not relating to this subject (mental illness, pre-cold war). This discussion - as you directed me to via bold reversion - is not a consensus. The fact that the quotes that stand in section currently directly relating to "Patton [referencing the] Jewish survivors in displaced persons camps which he oversaw" proves what his active duty was at the time and who he was referring to. [[User:Maineartists|Maineartists]] ([[User talk:Maineartists|talk]]) 14:31, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
:Couple few things... I did not "direct you to this discussion", just the talk page in general, as BRD suggests you should've started a dicussion instead of reverting that edit again. But if you would rather tack on your comments to this thread, so be it. As for your comments, they are rather lengthy and you didn't provide a tl;dr version, so it'll take me a bit to digest and respond. Meanwhile, [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=George_S._Patton&diff=prev&oldid=1135972948&diffmode=source the edit you reverted] was first added by {{u|Harry Sibelius}} and then first reverted by {{u|Hohum}} before you or I arrived on the scene, so they should be pinged and given an opportunity to take part here. And so with that... we'll go from there. Ttys - [[User talk:Thewolfchild|<span style="color:black">w<span style="color: red;">o</span>lf</span>]] 17:07, 28 January 2023 (UTC)


I was looking at the main image and I believe that there are higher quality images than that. I'll put a few images, and I feel like we can decide based off of consensus on what we will pick. I personally really like '''Image B'''<gallery>
::This appears to be a fuller version of the quote from his diary, commenting on a report written by Earl G. Harrison about the way the Jews in Germany were being treated by the US Army after the war
File:General George S Patton.jpg|'''Image A (current)'''
::{{quote|One of the chief complaints is that the DP (Displaced Person) are kept in camps under guard. Of course Harrison is ignorant of the fact that if they were not kept under guard they would not stay in the camps, would spread over the country like locusts and should eventually have to be rounded up after quite a few of them had been shot and quite a few Germans murdered and pillaged.}}
File:General George Patton by Robert F. Cranston, Lee Elkins, and Harry Warnecke, 1945, color carbro print, from the National Portrait Gallery - NPG-NPG 95 404Patton-000002.jpg|'''Image B'''
::{{quote|The brilliant Mr. Harrison further objected to the sanitary conditions. Again being ignorant of the fact that we frequently have to use force in order to prevent the inmates - Germans, Jews and other people - from defecating on the floor when ample facilities are provided outside.|https://spartacus-educational.com/2WWpatton.htm}}
File:George S. Patton 01.jpg|'''Image C'''
::The second phrase suggests he is lumping all DP's together and not singling out Jews for that comment.
File:GeorgeSPatton cropped.jpg|'''Image D'''
::I believe this later quote from the same diary entry is far more damning of him though, and is quite specific:
File:George S. Patton 06.jpg|'''Image E (can be cropped)'''
::{{quote|Harrison and his ilk believe that the Displaced Person is a human being which he is not, and this applies particularly to the Jews who are lower than animals.}}
</gallery>[[User:Wcamp9|Wcamp9]] ([[User talk:Wcamp9|talk]]) 02:09, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
::However, the "lower than animals phrase" is already used in the section. It seems redundant to use two quotes from the same short diary entry, especially when the existing entry in the article covers his opinion emphatically, while the one recently reverted is one open to question.
::([[User:Hohum|<b style="color: Green;">Hohum</b>]] [[User talk:Hohum|<sup style="color: Red;">@</sup>]]) 17:40, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
::As I was not the OP nor the editor that reverted him, I addressed the editor who reverted me (without any history summary, by the way, except WP: BLD and a directive to go to the Talk Page). If what you say is correct, then Hohum should have brought the discussion here. I provided more than an adequate history summary (TL:DR) to warrant my revert. That being said, I tacked it onto this discussion because your initial summary directive was lacking in specifics, to say the least. So "going to the Talk Page" and seeing a section on Anti-semitic views and a discussion on DPs; I gathered this was your intent. My apologies if you were merely telling me where to go in general. Regardless, it is unproductive to point out "should haves" when the topic at hand is the above discussion. Lengthy or not, if my summary was not enough to warrant a reversion, then it stands to reason sources with extracted quotes to save time will have to suffice. Let us proceed and not divert from the task at hand. Thanks. [[User:Maineartists|Maineartists]] ([[User talk:Maineartists|talk]]) 17:49, 28 January 2023 (UTC) [[User:Maineartists|Maineartists]] ([[User talk:Maineartists|talk]]) 17:49, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
{{od}}
This seems a clear case of why [[WP:PRIMARY|primary sources]] are a problem. Should we not find a good secondary source that includes the context? --John ([[User:Jwy]]/[[User talk:Jwy|talk]]) 18:37, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
:{{reply to|Jwy}} There are plenty of [[secondary source]]s. See above. @{{User|Hohum}} If there is such a debate as to whether or not Patton was specifically generalizing all DPs in this specific quote, even though related Patton correspondences link exact verbiage to his speech on Jewish DPs solely, then we should provide separate supporting sources to back the claim that Patton spoke derogatory of other DPs at this time (Nazi prisoners, Jewish supporters) separate from what he said specifically about Jewish DPs. It is difficult to know from a personal editorial standpoint who Patton is talking about at specific times in his writings. Here he is speaking of all DPs: "gain being ignorant of the fact that we frequently have to use force in order to prevent the inmates - Germans, Jews and other people - from defecating on the floor when ample facilities are provided outside." But here he is specifically talking about Jewish DPs: "the camps had been clean and decent before the arrival of the Jewish DPs who were “pissing and crapping all over the place.” Likewise, Patton did not say such quotes for all DPs: “the displaced sons-of-bitches in the various camps are blooming like green trees" much like the original quote: "they would not stay in the camps, would spread over the country like locusts", but specifically for Jewish DPs. But I am not allowed to make that connection as personal opinion. It must be backed by reliable secondary sources. When experts and historians in the field specifically draw definitive conclusions that Patton was referring to Jewish DP, then there can be no debate. However, I'm willing to stop the splitting hairs and work for the betterment of the section. I do feel there is more to be said on this topic. If you feel there is too much ambiguity about this particular DP reference, then there is much more that Patton said and wrote about the Jews during this time that was not in his diary. Am I correct that your only objection was that of redundancy within the same source and not of an expansion on the section as a whole? Thanks. [[User:Maineartists|Maineartists]] ([[User talk:Maineartists|talk]]) 21:06, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
:: My position is that using ''unambiguous'' quotes supported by reliable secondary sources conveys information the most clearly. Also, yes, using multiple fragments from the same couple of paragraphs of his diary to restate the same information is redundant, and opens up potential accusations of cherrypicking repeatedly from one "event".
::Additionally, the best reliable sources would be from educators, historians, etc. Not journalists. ([[User:Hohum|<b style="color: Green;">Hohum</b>]] [[User talk:Hohum|<sup style="color: Red;">@</sup>]]) 21:21, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
:::Hi, I'm the one who added the following: ''"If they were not kept under guard, they would not stay in the camps, would spread over the country like locusts, and would eventually have to be rounded up after quite a few of them had been shot and quite a few Germans murdered and pillaged."''
:::When it was reverted by @[[User:Hohum|Hohum]], his excuse was, ''"This is a comment about all displaced persons, which isn't only Jews, and it's unclear whether it's antisemitic, or an attempt to prevent reprisals and deaths."''
:::I actually agree that the quote ''may not'' specifically refer to Jews. If he is indeed talking about DPs generally, and not Jews specifically, then I can see your point in suggesting that it does not belong under "Antisemitism". When I added the quote, I believed that it added fuller context as to ''why'' Patton made those anti-Jewish remarks, as he believed they would become a danger to civilians if they were to escape.
:::Where I would take serious issue is your remark that it's unclear whether Patton's desire was ''"antisemitic"'' '''''or''''' ''"an attempt to prevent reprisals and deaths."'' I do not see why there has to be dichotomy between the two. It's like asking whether someone ''really'' dislikes Woody Allen's films, or if they're just antisemitic. Sometimes, the answer is both.
:::What I do think would be an incredibly useful addition to the "Antisemitism" section, whether my contribution is kept or not, are '''''dates''''' for Patton's antisemitic journal entries. This is especially important, as Patton had remarked in Spring of 1945 on his visit to the Ohrdruf concentration camp on the brutality of the Germans towards their prisoners (in a letter to Eisenhauer, not yet included in this article.) Making clear whether Patton's antisemitic remarks regarding Jewish prisoners preceded or anteceded his visit to Ohrdruf is very important to understanding his thinking. Is it not incredibly valuable to know whether Patton '''''first''''' visited the concentration camps (detailed in this article), decrying the conditions there in a letter to Eisenhauer, (not yet in this article), but later came to blame the conditions in the camps on the prisoners themselves (also not yet in this article), '''''or whether this happened in the reverse order?'''''
:::I agree that if the quote regarding DPs is not in fact about Jews (though I believe it is, if not specifically and exclusively) it probably ''does not '' belong in the antisemitism section, ''though I think'' the remark does add value to the article by putting into context Patton's opinions regarding Jews. After all, the quotes used to illustrate Patton's antisemitism in this article are '''''entirely''''' quotes regarding Jews in concentration camps, '''''and not''''' Jews of any other kind. [[User:Harry Sibelius|Harry Sibelius]] ([[User talk:Harry Sibelius|talk]]) 09:29, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
::::My 21:37, 28 January 2023 (UTC) reply below still applies. Your logic above might be correct, but it is [[WP:OR|original research]] - unless it is cited by non-primary, [[WP:RS|reliable resource(s)]]. --John ([[User:Jwy]]/[[User talk:Jwy|talk]]) 16:20, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
:::::Well, I believe the source I used when I added the quote was a secondary source: a Washington Post article by a Jewish author commenting on Patton's diary entries, and making the assumption that the "Displaced Persons" referred to in the primary-source (Patton's diary) were Jews. [[User:Harry Sibelius|Harry Sibelius]] ([[User talk:Harry Sibelius|talk]]) 06:54, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
::::::My point about the dates is simply that the dates of Patton's letters and diary entries have been very difficult for me to find, and I think that the dates would be easier to find if I had the primary-source (the diaries). [[User:Harry Sibelius|Harry Sibelius]] ([[User talk:Harry Sibelius|talk]]) 07:07, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
:::::::@[[User:Hohum|Hohum]]@[[User:Jwy|Jwy]]@[[User:Maineartists|Maineartists]]So, shall I revert the edit to include my addition of the quote on displaced persons, portraying them as Jews, now that it is clear that my source was a secondary-source which provided commentary? [[User:Harry Sibelius|Harry Sibelius]] ([[User talk:Harry Sibelius|talk]]) 09:15, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
::::::::@[[User:Harry Sibelius|Harry Sibelius]] Although I am confident that Patton was indeed referring to Jewish DP in this specific quote, I must agree that consensus errs on the side of ambiguity to uninformed readers when the quote stands alone. Without supporting the quote with addition sourced content to explain who Patton was referencing, the argument for both sides can still be presented; and to include all of the above just to validate this one term seems a bit undue weight. Unless the section itself is expanded to show more examples of Patton's anti-semtism to include this quote with the RS named above, I think the quote that is there now is sufficient. But I will wait to hear what @[[User:Hohum|Hohum]] and @[[User:Jwy|Jwy]] have to say. Thanks. [[User:Maineartists|Maineartists]] ([[User talk:Maineartists|talk]]) 11:26, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
::I'm not arguing either side of the discussion, just pointing out that ANY interpretation of the primary source should be supported '''in the article''' by secondary sources(s) (not just here on this talk page). --John ([[User:Jwy]]/[[User talk:Jwy|talk]]) 21:37, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
:::{{reply to|Hohum}} Agreed. {{reply to|Jwy}} Agreed. [[User:Maineartists|Maineartists]] ([[User talk:Maineartists|talk]]) 21:45, 28 January 2023 (UTC)


:I believe '''Image B''' is best - highest quality, a military portrait (I think official), shows all of his awards, etc. [[User:Wcamp9|Wcamp9]] ([[User talk:Wcamp9|talk]]) 02:10, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
== The first Patton in America was Robert Patton ==
::it really fits. [[User:Eustathius|Eustathius]] ([[User talk:Eustathius|talk]]) 18:32, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
Actually, the first Patton in America was [[James Patton (Virginia colonist)|James Patton]] (1692-1755), who arrived in Virginia in 1738 or 1740. He was born in Ireland of a Scottish father. I did not edit this line in the article, because I suspect the Robert Patton referred to is an ancestor of George Patton, and I can't be sure that James Patton is related. [[User:Cmacauley|Cmacauley]] ([[User talk:Cmacauley|talk]]) 07:46, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
:::👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
:::The image that show his Official portrait in 1945 is perfect.
:::❤️🔥 [[User:Warrior of Persosphere|Warrior of Persosphere]] ([[User talk:Warrior of Persosphere|talk]]) 01:36, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
::::The Image B, Shows the big american civiliziation with the (U.S.) Golden marks... [[User:Warrior of Persosphere|Warrior of Persosphere]] ([[User talk:Warrior of Persosphere|talk]]) 04:16, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 04:16, 3 November 2024

Featured articleGeorge S. Patton is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on November 11, 2016.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 19, 2013Good article nomineeListed
March 3, 2013WikiProject A-class reviewApproved
September 8, 2013Featured article candidatePromoted
On this day... A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on November 11, 2019.
Current status: Featured article

What is in a name?

[edit]

Would someone please add something that explains why the General is known as George S. Patton "Junior", when his grandfather is denoted as George S. Patton I and his father is listed as George S. Patton II? I cannot reconcile this anomaly, especially when Patton names his son George S. Patton IV. Perhaps I missed this, but it is not in the Early Life section, where the Patton lineage is discussed in length. MissMaryMack14 (talk) 21:44, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can an admin strike through my edits because I don't want anyone to learn anything from my edits?

[edit]

After editing this article, I seem to have been reverted by some very, very clever people who are so clever they don't think anyone else needs to know any more information about Patton's death. Using such a clever argument about my grammar (ho ho if only you knew who I was really was) - and of course I am being polite - because it's so so important to be polite to these individuals who sign up to do free work on this site for those little badges. That what they have written is preserved.

I therefore demand that my edits are struck through by an admin so no one else can know and thus learn anything from what I wrote. I don't want others to know the location of Patton's crash, the name of the street it happened on, and other historical details. Can this be done? I mean luckily there are so many other professionally written web articles (hence where I got my own info from) others can start from scratch and do their own research. Hence I don't want my edits to be a help to anyone on here so I want my edits struck through and kept from public view.146.90.208.242 (talk) 21:45, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Typically, if content has been added in good faith, it doesn't violate the copyrights of someone else's work, the content is appropriate for the article and supported by reliable sourcing, then demanding it be removed out of spite is not really a sufficiecnt reason. Once you contribute content to Wikipedia, it's not really yours anymore, (you'll find more info on that here and here). If your experience here has left you with a bad taste, it's probably best to just walk away. I'm not suggesting you leave Wikipedia completely, but instead perhaps consider working on a different arricle. (jmho) - wolf 03:44, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Unless the poster has violated Wiki policy, inviting him to stop working non an article smacks of censorship? Jokem (talk) 06:00, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Suggesting they take a break from an article that is leading to such ill-will that they are demanding content be censored out spite is just that... a suggestion. And you somehow think it's a bad one? - wolf 06:46, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OP, since you made this request on 2 July, an unknowable number of editors could have looked back through the history and identified exactly what you have contributed. Then, in case your request is ever acted on, they could have strategically kept a record of your edits, and then, once they've been expunged from the article's history and the article proper, they could just add them back in under their own editorships. So the info is not going to be lost no matter what happens. Best to just walk away. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 09:20, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
you are spot on - it is very interesting that the death circumstances are absolute - even the mention of assassination is not tolerated in the article or the front talk page it seems - going to the archives shows that in the past was some discussion about it - even sweden aka hidden hand / esse non videri / nobel / mordor - is mentioned in the archives .. but well .. something is very fishy - wikipedia imho part of the rug that is pulled .. tolkien's books are also interesting in this respect .. just leaving bread crumbs .. Ebricca (talk) 19:47, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring IP

[edit]

To the dynamic IP(s) reverting back and forth on the infobox img, please read WP:SLOWEW. I'm not too bothered by which of the two images are used, but this slow edit war has been going on for several months now, so either make a legitimate case on TP, or stop. Loafiewa (talk) 15:00, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tanks

[edit]

Arguably one of the most famous things about George S Patton are the tanks named after him.

These are the M46 Patton, M47 Patton, and M48 Patton. There is also an M60, which is almost identical to the M48, though I'm not sure if the M60 has 'Patton' in its name.

Also the M48 is my favourite tank, due to it being the main US MBT during the Vietnam war. It was also very versatile, being equipped with a 90mm M41 cannon, and later a 105mm cannon. 92.238.62.76 (talk) 17:42, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image

[edit]

I was looking at the main image and I believe that there are higher quality images than that. I'll put a few images, and I feel like we can decide based off of consensus on what we will pick. I personally really like Image B

  • Image A (current)
    Image A (current)
  • Image B
    Image B
  • Image C
    Image C
  • Image D
    Image D
  • Image E (can be cropped)
    Image E (can be cropped)

Wcamp9 (talk) 02:09, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe Image B is best - highest quality, a military portrait (I think official), shows all of his awards, etc. Wcamp9 (talk) 02:10, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
it really fits. Eustathius (talk) 18:32, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
The image that show his Official portrait in 1945 is perfect.
❤️🔥 Warrior of Persosphere (talk) 01:36, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Image B, Shows the big american civiliziation with the (U.S.) Golden marks... Warrior of Persosphere (talk) 04:16, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:George_S._Patton&oldid=1255102666"