Talk:Case Blue

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article nominee Case Blue was a Warfare good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
June 2, 2011 Good article nominee Not listed
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Germany (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Military history (Rated B-Class)
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality assessment scale.
WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors
WikiProject icon A version of this article was copy edited by a member of the Guild of Copy Editors on May 16, 2011. The Guild welcomes all editors with a good grasp of English and Wikipedia's policies and guidelines to help in the drive to improve articles. Visit our project page if you're interested in joining! If you have questions, please direct them to our talk page.
WikiProject Romania  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Romania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Romania-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Stock post message.svg
To-do list for Case Blue:
No to-do list assigned.


Hi Andreas. I just read your point on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history about the problem of naming "Operation Blue". What about "Germany's 1942 summer offensive"? It's not very long, compared to many other article names in Wikipedia, and it is much more descriptive for non-military buffs. And the risk of mixing it up with other operations during that summer (i.e. mainly Rommel's activities in Northern Africa) is very small. Just an idea... Best regards Thomas Blomberg 01:07, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

It shouldn't be "Operation Blue". Fall Blau is "Case Blue", not "Operation Blue"; it's not an operational codename, it's a war plan. (I can't recall the German for "operation", tho...) Trekphiler 00:07, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I think the German word for "operation" is "Unternehmen", but I'm not really sure. (talk) 22:56, 20 May 2009 (UTC)


I'm having feelings that this article should be removed. The information is contained enough to fit on the Battle for Stalingrad article. Colonel Marksman 00:43, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

No this article is relevant, and is an important component of WWII. This article only needs expansion.(Lucas(CA) 03:59, 23 February 2007 (UTC))

Inclusion of Seydlitz?[edit]

Shouldn't Operation Seydlitz (2-13 July 1942) be part of this article?

Just what was Operation Seydlitz? I thought I knew all of the major WW2 offensives, but this is one codename I've seen for the very first time. (talk) 22:59, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I just found a link in the article about the Rshyev battle. It leads to a German book about an involved division. On this page, the Operation Seydlitz (named after a famous Cavalry General from the 18th century) is mentioned: (talk) 08:17, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Removal of External Links[edit]

There are currently two external links leading to a boardgame website that is not relevant to the article save for the boardgames being potentially related to the subject of the article. The website itself is also offline. These links should be removed as they do not add to the article and do not contain any further relevant information, they seem to be nothing more than an attempt to gain more attention for the companies products.

  • edit* just noticed that they are in the "popular culture" section. Should the links to the external sites still remain in this article? One of them has it's own wikipedia article with an external link, the external link on this one still does not serve a purpose. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:02, 29 December 2008 (UTC)


I have just spent a considerable amount of time copyediting this article but there are some parts which I still don't understand, e.g.:

In the 'Army Group A' section:
1. Para 5, 1st sentence: "On 2 November 1942, they captured Nalchik, the capital of Kabardo-Balkiar, for pressured to Vladikavkaz (Orjonikidze), capital of Ossetia north of the Georgian military pass en route to Grozny in the south west area."
2. Para 6, 3rd sentence: "There was also success for a Wehrmacht high mountain section from the Karachai-Cherkess area, raising Mount Elbrus in the Causacus Ranges."
In the 'Board Games' section:
3. 4th bullet point: Edelweiss was released by Clash of Arms and covers the descent in the Causacus will supply highly simulated".

Any ideas anyone?

RASAM (talk) 16:46, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Third has already been fixed by someone. The second means that a german unit captured the Elbrus mountain and raised the swastika flag there. The first i dont know too. StoneProphet (talk) 05:38, 20 December 2010 (UTC)


The casualties calculation i made is a bit shaky, maybe someone has better sources to make the timespan of both numbers more comparable. Soviet casualties are possibly higher (missing some January/February casualties), but i only have Glantz's tables (who is quoting Krivosheev) and not Krivosheev as original. StoneProphet (talk) 21:38, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

I agree, casualty-rates of about 75% are a bit unrealistic, I think the number of soldiers participating in these battles is mcuh too low. Ecthelion 28 June 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:38, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

The strenght is only the initial strenght at the start of the offensive. The German Allies troops then rose to about 500,000 and both sides also poured massive replacements into the theatre. StoneProphet (talk) 19:58, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Badly oiled[edit]

Maybe of interest (or use): I came across a Hayward article ("Too Little, Too Late") at Google Scholar, reproduced from Journal of Military History, on Hitler's missed opportunity to attack Sov oil in Fall Blau. TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 09:38, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

spliting of army group south : Braunschweig or Fischreir[edit]

I have looked at many sources and the similarities between Fischreir and Braunchweig is quite confusing. in this very article the drive toward stalingrad held both names in the same paragraph !

I think I have finaly found the answer :

Acording to "Weisung nr 45" the drive toward Stalingrad (and after that to Astrakhan) is named opération Fischreir.

the instruction #45 in itself is entitled continuation of operation Braunscheig, so this operation was launched before Fischreir and Edelweiss.

I have read that operation Blau (started the 28th june) was renamed operation Braunchweig the 30th of june which would explain the name of hitler's order the 23rd of july.

I don't know if we can consider this as a reliable sources, so I am not corecting the article yet :

  • about the renaming

  • text of weisung #45

Could someone find anything more consistant (especially about the renaming of case blue) & make this "Brauncweig/Fischreir" point clear ?

Ereinon (talk) 14:32, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes thats right. According to the war diary of the Wehrmacht (Kriegstagebuch des Oberkommandos der Wehrmacht), Operation Blau was renamed on 30 June to Braunschweig (before the split). Thats why Directive No 45 is titled with "continuation of Braunschweig", because this is the same as "continuation of Case Blue". "Edelweiß" is the advance into the Caucasus. "Fischreiher" is the advance towards Stalingrad. StoneProphet (talk) 08:54, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
I changed this article as well as the Operation Braunschweig article. StoneProphet (talk) 09:04, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
To make the things a bit more complicated : David Glantz in the Stalingrad trilogy (in the first pages of vol 2 if I am not mistaken) says that "Braunschweig" is equivalent to "Blau III" :(
Ereinon (talk) 08:41, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
Well i took it directly from the primary source which is pretty clear (p. 460 but also one other occasions). Whole Blau was renamed to "Braunschweig". Blau II to "Clausewitz" and Blau III to "Dampfhammer". The renaming is recorded for 30 June. The other operation names (Edelweiß and Fischreiher) then were introduced with Directive No 45 later. Dunno what Glantz is writing, but either he got it wrong too, or he is meaning something different. StoneProphet (talk) 01:42, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

File:M3 Tank Stalingrad.JPG Nominated for Deletion[edit]

Image-x-generic.svg An image used in this article, File:M3 Tank Stalingrad.JPG, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests October 2011
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 12:08, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Soviet Casualties[edit]

Regarding the edits, here the explanation: Glantz and Krivosheev are the same, because Glantz is only quoting Krivosheev from the table.

Glantz gives the following numbers: killed or missing / wounded / total

Voronezh-Vorosh Defense (28 June-24 July 42): 370,522 / 197,825 / 568,347
Stalingrad Defense (17 July-18 Nov. 42) 323,856 / 319,986 / 643,842
N. Cauc. Defense (25 July-31 Dec. 42) 192,791 / 181,120 / 373,911
Stalingrad Offensive (19 Nov. 42-2 Feb. 43) 154,885 / 330,892 / 485,777
N. Cauc. Offensive (1 Jan. -4 Feb. 43) 69,627 / 84,912 / 154,539

Thats a grand total of 2,226,416. I looked those numbers up and they are indeed in Krivosheev too. Your count is ~500,000 casualties lower, because you appearently did not count the North Cauacasus offensive operation (to 4 February) and you did not count all of the Voronezh-Vorosh Defense Operation. You only counted the Bryansk Front. StoneProphet (talk) 14:59, 21 March 2014 (UTC)