Talk:Gerd von Rundstedt

Hello, somebody just added to the discussion page of the Dutch wiki that we should rename the article to Gerd von Rundstedt as we have now named it Karl von Rundstedt. All of the books I have read about the second ww in Dutch (and these are quite a lot) refer to the man als Karl! Why was chosen for the lemmaname of Gerd? Waerth 21:21, 31 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Gerd is much more common. But I'm not German, so what do I know! Aaрон Кинни (t) 10:55, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

AFAIK he didn't use his other two forenames, he is usualy referred to as only Gerd von Rundstedt. --Denniss 15:08, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

For some reason all attempts to introduce some realism into an article that appears as an insuffereble love fest for Rundstedt aresummarily reverted. It has long become depressingly apperant that Wikipedia is colonised by some incorrugible Wehrmacht worshippers, but this too much.

I too have noticed the von Rundstedt fervor, why is there so much favoritism for this general. i move that this page be marked as biased--Manwithbrisk 22:01, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

May i ask which source says that the count of prisoners of Kiev siege was approximately 400.000?

the Soviet marshal Moskalenko reported in 1969 that the some total of Soviet troops possesd by the encircled units was a mere 452,000 while Erickson reports that a total of 150,541 subsequently escaped or fought their way out of encirclement. This would put the total of Soviet troops permanently trapped in the pocket at almost exactly 300,000 of whom a large number doubtlessly died fighting. However Glantz, though accepting Moskalenko's tally, puts the number of Soviet troops who made it out of encirclement at around a mere 15,000 (When Titans Clashed) I am inclined to accept Erickson's figure and regard the 15,000 figure as a mere typo but in the absence of conclusive proof I cannot authorotatively exclude it. What is one to do???. Giving Rundstedt the benefit of the doubt I reluctuntly accepted the Glantz figure. Perhaps the matter should be more extensively covered in a footnote in the article itself for it seems very likely that the actual figure was a mere 300,000 permanently trapped and that Glantz's 15,000 breaking out of encirclement was indeed a mere typing error, but how does one get in touch with Glantz to make sure?!

The case of Rundstedts apply for a halt is not definite.Liddell Hart tells the opposite while Willam Shirer thinks he is responsible for the halt order.I request it to be removed from the article. About Kiev casualties: Evan Mawdsley gives the number 616.000, Anthony Beevor 665.000 (prisoners only) and Norman Davies the 657.000's. Guderian claims 290.000. (Also prisoners only)

Curious. Davies quote 'numerous sources', Mawdsley 'Poteri' (?) and Beevor is quite vague.

two images?

In the article it says something about two images but there is only one. Why does it say 2 images if there is only one?

Agreed; change duly made. Nibios 14:58, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Hitler wanting peace with Britain

I am not sure why this is taking up so much space in the Rundstedt article. It's a tiny part of Rundstedt's overall career. It might merit more space in the article on Hitler, perhaps, but not here. -- Hongooi 18:01, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

* I agree with you and have removed the section.  It's basically primary research so it doesn't even belong on Wikipedia. Comatose51 03:55, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Correct name spelling

Is it Rundstedt or Randstedt? On the German Wiki its the later.--Mrg3105 (talk) 03:23, 23 December 2007 (UTC)