Talk:Nikolai Fyodorovich Vatutin
|WikiProject Biography / Military||(Rated Start-class)|
|WikiProject Russia / History / Military||(Rated Start-class, High-importance)|
The article states:
"On March 28, 1943, Vatutin took command over Voronezh Front, preparing for the momentous Battle of Kursk. Starting with this battle, Vatutin achieved marked superiority in generalship over Manstein because of his innovative approaches to operational and tactical techniques. In the battle of Kursk, he rejected conventional echeloning of armies; his innovative deployment allowed him not only to skilfully conduct defense against the technically superior Germans but also to quickly switch from defense to offense. Following the Soviet victory at Kursk, Vatutin surprised Manstein who believed that the Red Army was too weak to go on the offense, and captured Belgorod." (my italics)
At Kursk the situation was this:
The Soviets were fighting a defensive battle - the stronger form of war. The Soviets knew the German plan to attack and kept this fact hidden from the Germans. So they had the element of surprise. The Soviets had plenty of time to prepare the battle. The Soviets outnumbered the Germans 1:1,6 in men The Soviets outnumbered the Germans 1:1,33 in tanks The Soviets outnumbered the Germans 1:1,2 in aircraft The Germans were (arguably) technically superiour.
Now, there's no arguing who won the battle. However, there are some interesting matters to consider: German losses were 50.000. The Soviets 180.000. That's a ratio of 1:3,6 German tank losses were 300. The Soviets lost 1.600. Thats a ratio of 1:5,3 German air Losses were 200. The Soviets lost 1.000. That's a ratio of 1:5
If one considers the fact that the russians had numerical superiority on all counts, were fighting a defensive battle AND had the element of surprise, isn't it interesting how the germans lost no more than a third of what the russians did, in the "German Kursk" campaign?
And more interesting, as stated above, Vatutin achieved marked superiority in generalship over Manstein
Now, what does the numbers say about Vatutin's superiority in generalship over Manstein?
To me, it seems that someone is a fan of Vatutin, and not so much of the fighting men of the Red Army, who bled him a victory over a clearly inferiour, surprised enemy.--Nwinther 13:21, 15 January 2007 (UTC) ++++++++++++++ Nwinther made a very intelligent observation. Vatutin indeed has strong fans. Among them the leading American historians of the Eastern Front David Glantz and Richard Armstrong.
I have given this article a start rating based mainly on the lack of references. If a good amount of references are found to back up the claims of this article, it would be a good contender for a B rating - • The Giant Puffin • 10:36, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
|This article, or a portion of it, was copyedited by the League of Copyeditors in November 2007. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.|
Copyediting is complete but i have a few concerns:
- The article lacks sources and without sources/inline citations, it is hardly encyclopedic.
- A few redlinks can be rectified by making stub class articles and linking them to it.
- While at some places dates are mentioned adequately, there are paragraph's which give no idea of date/time chronology, for eg. the sub-section, "The Battles in the North" starts off without mentioning the date or the year of the attack.
- Article seems to eulogise Vatutin a lot. He might be a great soldier but encyclopedic content needs to be verifiable and neutral.
- There is literally no information about his personal and family life in the article. There is also no info about his pre-soldiering days.
If the following issues are addressed then the article can be reviewed and emerge as a A-class or even higher class article.Gprince007 15:02, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
- Copyediting this article, I echo many of the points above. In particular, there is a significant amount of flattery, peacock terms and eulogy. There is also a significant lack of sourcing. Happy‑melon 15:26, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
Undue weight given to Vatutin as an individual
I've edited the article to change 'heroic' type statements that imply Vatutin single-handedly did this or that. His subordinate forces did the fighting and dying (except of course when he was ambushed). Also removed excessive adjectives.1812ahill (talk) 17:52, 14 December 2013 (UTC)