Talk:Battle of Stalingrad

Question about the casualties section

Here's a quote from the main article: "If the losses of Army Group A, Army Group Don and other German units of Army Group B during the period 28 June 1942 to 2 February 1943 are included, German casualties were well over 600,000."

My question is, why are these casualties not included in the chart at the top of the article? Did these army groups fight in Stalingrad? My guess would be from reading the section that these perhaps fought outside of the inner city line or something? If this is the case, do the soviet casualties include fighting outside of the inner city?

Furthermore, i wanted to comment on the following sentence: "955 Soviet civilians died in Stalingrad and its suburbs from aerial bombing by Luftflotte 4 as the German 4th Panzer and 6th Armies approached the city."

I feel like some additional information about civilian casualties in the battle is missing. This could lead to people reading this and assuming that only 955 civilians where killed during the battle. I know the article never makes such claims, but some additional information would be very nice. For instance, consider reading Encyclopedia Brittanicas article about the battle (https://www.britannica.com/event/Battle-of-Stalingrad), where they say that about 40,000 civilians died. Maybe this could be a nice addition?

With regards, Viktor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SeñorBiktor (talk • contribs) 14:56, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Why does the quick info panel call out tank losses caused and inflicted specifically for Romanians, but not for any other nation? This probably shouldn't be there, could be moved to main article body. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.165.222.52 (talk) 21:31, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Battle of Stalingrad/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: JohnWickTwo (talk · contribs) 01:29, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

The review may take a day or two to prepare. This article also has over a dozen citation requests throughout the article which need to be taken care of promptly. Let me know when the cite requests have been addressed. JohnWickTwo (talk) 01:29, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Ill be happy to take part in this. I have been watching this article for months and I thought several times about GANing it, but I'm not particularly good in GA domain. L293D (☎ • ✎) 01:43, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Of course, I'm no reviewer, but I might be inclined to fail this GA. The whole prelude section is not verifiable enough - large paragraphs of text are wholly unsourced. There also are six {{citation needed}}s throughout the article in addition to on {{page needed}} that need attention. L293D (☎ • ✎) 02:07, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

I noted the lack of citations throughout the article as well. I suspect that this is going to take quite a bit of time to address so had contacted the nominator to confirm whether they had the time/resources to deal with this and whether it should be quick-failed so it could be worked on at their leisure. Unfortunately, by the time I finished writing my comments, the article had been claimed for review. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 02:09, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks to both editors for their comments. Let's give the nominating editor a day or two for the edits to see where the article stands at that time. JohnWickTwo (talk) 03:47, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Article subject to quick close at request of nominating editor

This article has been quick closed at the request of the nominating editor who has contacted me on my Talk page over night. The contributing editor has apparently made a good faith effort to withdraw the article after being contacted by another editor concerning other unaddressed issues with the article. JohnWickTwo (talk) 23:12, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Inconsistency

The section "Sixth Army Surrounded" claims the following:

"When asked by Hitler, Göring replied, after being convinced by Hans Jeschonnek,[5]:234 that the Luftwaffe could supply the 6th Army with an 'air bridge.' This would allow the Germans in the city to fight on temporarily while a relief force was assembled.[20]:926."

However, Hans Jeschonnek shot himself on the 18th of August, 1943. How could he possibly have influenced Göring if the events being described above would have occurred sometime in November of 1943, after the Soviet armies surrounded Stalingrad? Hitler, Göring, and Jeschonnek would not have been discussing an air bridge anytime before August 18th, as the battle had not even started yet. I have seen this rumor claimed in other places as well, but it simply makes no sense. Either clarification is needed regarding when Jeschonnek supported an air bridge (earlier in the battle, perhaps, which still is completely dubious unless proven) or it needs to be removed completely as blame is being attributed to the wrong person entirely. Thetimsterr (talk) 22:47, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

In response to the above passage, august 18th, 1943 was approximately 6 months after the END of the battle of stalingrad (end date 2nd February, 1943). During the conference cited by many history books as the date in which Goring allegedly "convinced" hitler that the Luftwaffe could supply the sixth army by air (20th november 1942), Goring was actually in Karinhall at a petroleum conference , the luftwaffe representative present at the conference (held in berchtesgaden), was in fact Hans Jeschonnek. Goring has been widely attributed blame for convincing hitler to keep the sixth army in place due to manstein's memoirs and the memoirs of other german generals attempting to shift blame.

Thank you for pointing out my error in the dates. I completely jumbled the end date of Stalingrad in my mind. Thetimsterr (talk) 22:47, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

References

Diameter of the pocket

Does anyone have information about the size of the pocket of stalingrad during the different stages of the battle? I couldn't find data anywhere. I'm asking mainly from interest, but I think it would be relevant to this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.226.13.175 (talk) 14:45, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 September 2018

It needs 40,000 civilians to be added for the Soviet side 124.180.195.182 (talk) 10:43, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. L293D (☎ • ✎) 20:15, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Missing Source Cited

In many places of the article there's a reference to Bergstrom (2007). Only a 2006 book by him exists. Is this an error for the 2006 book or is there an edit that erased the 2007 one? 104.172.125.252 (talk) 05:29, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

El Alamein was more important

The article overstates the importance of Stalingrad. From a strategic point of view the Second Battle of El Alamein was far more important as it ensured Allied victory in the North African Campaign, prevented the Axis from conquering the Middle East with its vast oil reserves, allowed the Allies to win the Battle of the Mediterranean, ended the Siege of Malta, and made possible the Allied invasions of Sicily, Italy and southern France. Also the lede should mention that Hitler opposed the 6th army evacuating Stalingrad on the advice of Goring and Manstein. Paulus failed to request permission to leave when the Soviet counteroffensive began in November 1942. (86.131.7.102 (talk) 19:28, 20 January 2019 (UTC))

1. This is not a debating forum, but you could make a brief addition (1–2 sentences) to the "Significance" section, with sources, to the effect that some historians don't think Stalingrad was so important. However, a detailed discussion of El Alamein would not be appropriate. In any case, I think you made the same point a year ago. If so, there is no point in repeating the same argument if you're not going to suggest improvements to the article. 2. The lead is a summary and can't go into details about the failure to evacuate.--Jack Upland (talk) 08:24, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

German(s)?

Grammatical error in the section "Sixth Army surrounded" on the third image. The caption says, "German dead in the city". The image depicts multiple dead bodies lying in a ditch. I think that "German" should be replaced with "Germans" or "German soldiers". TrueRavin (talk) 23:25, 27 January 2019 (UTC)