Talk:Battle of the Bulge
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Battle of the Bulge article.|
|Archives: 1, 2, 3|
|Battle of the Bulge is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.|
|This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 1, 2004.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day... section on December 16, 2011.|
|This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot I. Threads with no replies in 90 days may be automatically moved.|
|This article is written in American English (labor, realize, analyze), and some terms used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.|
File:Wacht am Rhein map (Opaque).svg to appear as POTD
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Wacht am Rhein map (Opaque).svg will be appearing as picture of the day on June 26, 2013. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2013-06-26. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:17, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
|Picture of the day|
The Battle of the Bulge was the last major German offensive campaign during World War II. Launched through the densely forested Ardennes region of Wallonia, it caught the Allies off guard and led to severe casualties. The name refers to the salient created by German advances in December 1944, shown on this map ( ); the battle concluded with an Allied victory in January 1945.
Legend: Front line, 16 December Front line, 20 December Front line, 25 December Allied movements German movements
Allied Air Craft Loss
The article only gives cursory treatment to the Allied counteroffensive part of the battle after presenting long passages of text about German offensive operations. Combat like that of Lutrebois is not mentioned at all. This can be addressed with edits, but I'd like to hear what other editors think. In its present state, the article is already lengthy.
I don't like the section "German counteroffensive" -- the section title is borderline misleading, and the German surprise air attack to the north is presented in tandem with the Nordwind Offensive as if they were part and parcel of the same operation. Same front, okay; but I'm not convinced there was much operational binding of the two. Nordwind itself seems to get almost too much mention for an article about the Battle of the Bulge, it seems like it should be mentioned in passing -- pointing out that movement of U.S. troops to the south in response to the Bulge improved German prospects for the Nordwind Offensive. Comments ? W. B. Wilson (talk) 04:30, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
Edits to the German casualty figures
In February 2012, user StoneProphet and I looked up a fair amount of material to establish good strength, reinforcement, and casualty figures for both sides with regards to this article. Although our efforts were diligent, some of the figures are simply not known to exact totals, and thus a range is given for the German casualty figures along with the sources providing those figures. Since February 2012, a couple of edits were made to the German casualties figure.
This one was made on 25 February. Unfortunately, no citation was provided and the IP contributor stopped editing Wikipedia within a month of making the edit.
This one was made on 16 December. It breaks out German casualties by category. Again, unfortunately, no source is provided. Worse, the total provided in this case was nowhere near the total provided by the 25 February edit.
Edits of this kind are welcome if they are sourced, and the source is considered reliable. Otherwise, they will be reverted. Concerns and questions about the German casualty figures can always be discussed on this talk page.
A comment on the quoted figure of 84,834 German casualties (from the edit of 25 February). This figure can be found on many internet sites, such as The Germans had 84,834 casualties including 15,652 dead, 27,582 MIA and 41,600 wounded. I have yet to see a firm source although the sites almost always quote the information as being from the "German High Command". Notably, a figure almost exactly the same, but minus 3,000, is given as a contemporary German estimate, the difference being the total of dead is quoted at 12,652 -- this mentioned in L. F. Ellis' Victory in the West, Volume 2, page 195. (This work is part of the United Kingdom's official history of the war.) But what is notable here is that Ellis accurately characterized the figure as a contemporary estimate. By the time the worldwide web arrived, this estimate was presented as an accurate total with exact losses by category. The problem is, of course, that the exact losses are not known and these figures were, and remain, an estimate formed by primary research. It is because of situations like this that the determination of casualties for battles remains problematic.
Possible copyright problem
This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. Diannaa (talk) 01:48, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
The battle for St. Vith. Some errors
I am a brand new contributor so I cannot make any changes myself. I would point out the following:
1. The text "The defenders, led by the 7th Armored Division and including the remaining regiment of the 106th U.S. Infantry Division, with elements of the 9th Armored Division and 28th U.S. Infantry Division, all under the command of Gen. Bruce C. Clarke" is incorrect. Bruce Clarke commanded Combat Command B of the 7th Armored Division and was under the command of the Division commander Robert Hasbrouck. The remnants of the 106th were under the command of Alan Jones. So it was a joint command under the two division commanders.
2. The text "At Montgomery's orders, St. Vith was evacuated on 21 December" is incorrect. The US troops (CCB 7th Armored Division) were driven from St. Vith on 21 December. The CCB 7th Armored Division did fall back to positions west of St. Vith on 21 December.
3. Montgomery did order the withdrawal of all forces ( 7th Armored Division, remaining 106th U.S. Infantry Division, elements of the 9th Armored Division and 28th U.S. Infantry Division). The order was given on 22 December with the withdrawal taking place on 23 December.
The above can be referenced to Cole as follows.
1. Command St. Vith forces. Pages 393-394